Guests - Dr. Andrew Fox, Dave Smith, Joel Strabla, Alex Kolodin, Jack Dona
With fewer than two weeks remaining before Arizona's November 3 election, questions about election administration, parental rights, government spending and public accountability are converging into a broader debate over the direction of the state.
In Pima County, reports of missing early ballots have placed election officials under increasing scrutiny. Republican leaders say voters who have lived at the same addresses for years are discovering that ballots never arrived, early-voting registrations were not recorded as expected, or replacement ballots must be requested before an approaching deadline.
Meanwhile, the county's decision to add a ballot drop box at the University of Arizona has raised questions about the distribution of voting locations, particularly in communities such as Marana and Green Valley.
For Kathleen Winn, chair of the Pima County Republican Party, the immediate objective is ensuring that eligible citizens vote. But the controversy has also reinforced her concerns about government transparency, the reliability of election systems and whether officials are providing adequate services to every community.
Those questions intersect with another fundamental disagreement: what happens when political institutions prioritize ideology over judgment?
Dr. Andrew Fox, an organizational-culture expert, professor, priest and author, argues that contemporary America is experiencing a crisis of moral independence. Former Pima County Republican Party chairman Dave Smith sees the approaching election as an opportunity to reverse policies he believes are damaging Arizona. Election Integrity Commission member Joel Strabala explains the voting procedures available to residents, while Secretary of State candidate Alex Kolodin and retired Master Sergeant Jack Dona challenge the systems and officials responsible for administering elections.
The underlying questions are about more than who wins in November. They concern whether individuals are willing to exercise their judgment, whether institutions can be trusted to perform their responsibilities and whether citizens remain engaged when political outcomes are uncertain.
Dr. Andrew Fox: When Truth Becomes a Popularity Contest, Society Loses Its Moral Compass
Dr. Andrew Fox believes Americans are increasingly surrendering independent moral judgment to fashionable political ideas.
Fox, who holds a doctorate in intercultural studies, has worked in 26 countries across Europe, North America, Africa and Asia. His professional background includes organizational leadership, cultural analysis and communication. He is also a priest and author of the newly released Truth in the Age of Applause: How Stupidity Is Ruining the American Dream.
The book examines how intelligent people can accept ideas they would otherwise question because those ideas have become socially or politically fashionable.
Fox uses a deliberately provocative definition of stupidity.
For him, it is not primarily a lack of intelligence. It is the decision to stop exercising independent judgment.
That distinction became central to his discussion with Kathleen Winn about a controversial girls' athletic competition in Washington state.
Washington Athletes Forfeit a Race in Protest
Winn described a cross-country competition in which approximately a dozen girls reportedly refused to participate because a transgender athlete was competing in the girls' division.
According to the account discussed, the athlete had previously competed on a boys' team earlier in the season.
Fox said the athlete had finished 74th while competing in the boys' category and subsequently placed second in a girls' race.
Those details were presented as the speakers understood the incident. The competition records and governing eligibility rules were not independently examined during the discussion.
Winn and Fox viewed the girls' decision to withdraw as a principled protest over competitive fairness.
The athletes had trained extensively. Some reportedly had opportunities to compete for significant state rankings.
By refusing to race, they sacrificed the immediate rewards of their preparation to make a public statement.
"They didn't create violence," Fox said. "They didn't invoke violence. They weren't burning anything down."
Instead, he argued, they demonstrated that a person can oppose a policy without becoming abusive or destructive.
"They respectfully protested what was happening," he said.
For Fox, the most important aspect was not the forfeited competition. It was the willingness of young people to act according to their convictions despite personal consequences.
Competitive Fairness and the Dignity of Female Athletes
Winn approached the issue as a mother of five daughters and grandmother of 13 granddaughters.
She believes female athletes deserve competitive opportunities based on consistent eligibility rules.
Fox, who has daughters and granddaughters of his own, shared that position.
Both expressed concern about athletic policies they believe fail to account adequately for physiological differences relevant to competition.
Fox also raised questions about privacy in women's changing facilities, referring to earlier controversies involving swimmer Lia Thomas and advocate Riley Gaines.
He argued that sports organizations must consider the dignity and privacy of all athletes when establishing participation rules.
The issue remains contested. Athletic governing bodies, medical experts, athletes and policymakers disagree over how to balance fairness, inclusion, privacy and the circumstances of individual competitors.
Fox's position was that institutions have become reluctant to defend distinctions he considers fundamental.
He believes that reluctance illustrates a deeper cultural problem: people are increasingly afraid to question policies that receive institutional approval.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer and the Danger of Surrendering Judgment
Fox drew on the writings of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the German Lutheran theologian who opposed Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime.
Bonhoeffer examined how educated and otherwise reasonable people could become participants in destructive political systems.
Fox emphasized that Bonhoeffer's warning was not simply about people lacking intelligence.
It concerned the surrender of moral independence.
"He said, look, you're smart, you're intelligent, you're rational, you're reasonable, you've got brains. But ... you're abdicating on your God-given moral judgment just to go along with the ideology," Fox explained.
Fox was careful to distinguish contemporary America from Nazi Germany.
"I'm not suggesting we have the Fourth Reich in the United States," he said.
His comparison concerned the underlying principle of ideological conformity, not an assertion that the two political systems are equivalent.
He believes intelligent people can become so accustomed to accepting institutional assumptions that they stop asking whether those assumptions are reasonable.
Truth Should Not Depend on Public Approval
The central idea of Fox's book is captured in its title.
"If truth has to win a popularity contest, it's not truth anymore. It's a performance," he said.
He continued with a warning about what happens when social approval becomes more important than reality.
"If any society is built on a performance, it eventually forgets what reality looks like."
Fox argued that political conformity frequently develops gradually.
An idea that would once have seemed extraordinary becomes controversial.
Then it becomes socially acceptable.
Eventually, questioning it may become more objectionable than the idea itself.
Fox described that process as an example of institutional ideology operating without attracting attention.
He believes the Washington athletes interrupted that process by refusing to participate.
Their protest forced a question that school and athletic officials might otherwise have avoided.
Fox Warns That Political Conformity Can Develop Without People Noticing
Fox used an extended metaphor to explain how societies change.
Imagine walking through a forest while concentrating entirely on the ground immediately ahead.
Each step seems ordinary.
Nothing appears dramatically different from the previous day.
But eventually, the person looks up and realizes the familiar surroundings have disappeared.
The path behind is no longer recognizable.
The path forward is uncertain.
Fox argued that societies can experience a similar transformation.
Political and cultural changes occur incrementally.
People remain busy with their families, jobs and responsibilities.
Only later do they recognize how substantially their institutions have changed.
"And you ask yourself, how did I get here?" Fox said.
"The answer is you didn't just get here. You weren't paying attention."
For Fox, the approaching election represents an opportunity for citizens to become more attentive.
He encouraged voters to examine candidates and officeholders at every level, including neighborhood associations and local governing boards.
A political decision does not become unimportant simply because it involves a small institution.
Moral Questions Are Different From Ordinary Policy Disagreements
Fox distinguished between conventional political questions and what he considers fundamental moral issues.
Taxation, housing, education spending, infrastructure, public services and foreign policy all involve competing priorities that can be evaluated through debate.
Reasonable people may disagree about the appropriate approach.
Fox believes some other questions involve principles that should not be treated as ordinary political bargaining.
He cited disputes involving children, parental authority and gender-related policies.
In his view, government should not impose ideological requirements that override parents' responsibilities or disregard what he considers fundamental moral distinctions.
His perspective reflects his religious and conservative philosophy. Many of the specific issues he discussed remain disputed legal, medical and political questions.
Nevertheless, Fox argued that voters should understand the difference between compromising over spending levels and surrendering a deeply held moral conviction.
Parents, Teachers and Churches Must Encourage Independent Thinking
Winn asked Fox how parents, educators and religious communities could defend their beliefs while respecting the dignity of people who disagree.
The question was especially important to her because she believes the current political climate discourages open discussion.
Fox's answer began with parental responsibility.
Parents should not assume that schools, entertainment companies or government institutions will automatically communicate the values they want their children to develop.
He argued that adults must pay attention to the messages children receive and help them learn to evaluate those messages critically.
Fox Questions Political Advocacy in Children's Entertainment
Fox identified Rachel Accurso, widely known as Ms. Rachel, as an example of a children's entertainer whose public political advocacy has attracted his criticism.
He acknowledged that her early educational work attracted a large audience and provided popular learning materials for young children.
But he questioned her more recent involvement in political issues and support for progressive candidates.
He also criticized appearances and associations involving gender-diverse entertainers and public figures, including Jules Hoffman and Dylan Mulvaney.
Fox argued that very young children cannot evaluate political messaging in the same way adults can.
His concern was that educational entertainment may introduce social and political ideas before children have the ability to assess them independently.
The discussion reflected Fox's assessment of the content and its political implications; it did not establish that the programs discussed were harmful to children.
Mr. Rogers Provides a Different Model
Fox contrasted contemporary political advocacy with Fred Rogers.
He recalled the famous 1969 scene in which Rogers and Black actor François Clemmons, who portrayed Officer Clemmons, shared a small pool and a towel.
The scene carried particular significance during an era of racial segregation and discrimination.
Fox described Rogers' approach as a model of demonstrating human dignity without turning a children's program into a conventional political campaign.
He argued that Rogers communicated inclusion through personal conduct.
In Fox's view, that approach allowed children to understand kindness and community without requiring them to adopt a political identity.
Winn Connects Parental Rights With Her Work Against Exploitation
Winn described her years working on child-sex-trafficking cases and efforts to recover missing children.
She recalled cooperating with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's office to help return an Arizona girl who had been located in Texas.
That experience, she said, shaped her concern for protecting vulnerable minors.
She also recalled attending President Trump's signing of an executive order concerning participation in women's sports alongside Riley Gaines.
For Winn, the issue is personal rather than abstract.
She believes parents and guardians have responsibilities that government institutions should respect.
"We have to protect our children," she argued, emphasizing that minors depend on adults to make decisions in their best interests.
Fox Warns Against Assuming Political Candidates Must Be Perfect
Fox, speaking from his experience as a priest, distinguished the standards applied to religious leaders from those applied to elected officials.
Clergy operate under religious obligations and, in his case, canon law.
Political representatives occupy a different role.
"We are voting for representatives. We're not voting for the clergy," he said.
He cautioned that every candidate has weaknesses.
Voters will not find a person whose judgment, character and record are perfect in every respect.
Instead, Fox argued, citizens should examine the candidate's governing philosophy and moral direction.
For him, the question is whether a candidate will protect the institutions and values that allow society to function.
Winn agreed, describing the election as a choice about the nation's long-term direction rather than a popularity contest.
Dave Smith: The Election Is a Test of Whether Arizona Voters Will Take Responsibility
Former Pima County Republican Party chairman Dave Smith believes the approaching election presents a straightforward challenge.
Voters who are dissatisfied with Arizona's leadership must participate in choosing their replacements.
Complaining is not enough.
Smith argued that residents have limited control over the policies adopted by elected officials, but they retain the power to cast a ballot and encourage others to do the same.
"You have the locus of control in your life," he said.
"You control your own life, your own actions."
For Smith, voting is an immediate action available to every eligible citizen.
He encouraged people to complete their ballots, return them and contact friends and neighbors who might otherwise skip the election.
Winn Remembers Her Father and Mother
The discussion included a personal remembrance.
October 22 marked 14 years since Winn's father, Frank, died in 2012 at age 76.
He was a proud United States Marine.
Winn said she continues to honor him through a personalized license plate associated with his name.
The anniversary was especially emotional because her mother had died on September 16, 2026.
Winn described missing both parents and the influence they had on her family.
Smith expressed sympathy and spoke about the importance of growing up with parents who provided stability and guidance.
Both connected family relationships to their concerns about the direction of contemporary society.
Winn's Deceased Mother Received a Ballot—and a Cancellation Notice
Winn then described an unusual development involving her mother's voter registration.
Her mother had been enrolled in early voting and received an election ballot even though she had died before ballots were distributed.
Several days later, Winn received a notice from the Recorder's Office confirming that the ballot had been canceled because her mother was deceased.
Winn said she was pleased the cancellation occurred correctly.
She joked that whoever managed that particular part of the election system deserved greater responsibility.
The incident demonstrated that at least one part of the county's voter-registration maintenance process was functioning.
But it also raised a question for Winn.
If the county could identify and cancel her mother's ballot, why were so many living voters reporting problems receiving theirs?
She emphasized that she never intended to cast her mother's ballot and planned to keep it as a personal memento.
Reports of Inaccurate Voter Rolls Raise Additional Questions
Smith discussed previous research by local election activists concerning unusual voter-registration records.
He referred to records allegedly associated with people more than 100 years old, including a case involving a person whose reported age exceeded 120.
Such entries can indicate inaccurate dates or outdated records, although they do not independently establish that ineligible ballots were cast.
Smith argued that election officials should maintain accurate rolls and identify errors before voting begins.
Winn agreed that outdated records deserve attention.
But her immediate concern was voters who were alive, registered and expecting ballots that had not arrived.
Winn Says 62 Voters She Personally Helped Had Not Moved
By October 22, Winn said she had helped 62 residents navigate early-ballot problems.
She had visited homes, checked registration information and assisted people requesting replacements.
According to Winn, none of those 62 voters had changed their residence.
That finding conflicted with her understanding of the Recorder's Office explanation that many ballot-delivery problems involved people who had moved or were not enrolled for early voting.
Winn emphasized that her experience did not represent a scientific sample of Pima County voters.
People contacting the Republican Party were more likely to be Republicans.
Nevertheless, she argued that the number of unresolved complaints deserved investigation.
A Mixed-Party Household Reports One Missing Ballot
Winn repeated the experience of a voter who monitored incoming mail through USPS Informed Delivery.
The service had displayed images of ballots addressed to both the voter and his wife.
The wife, a Democrat, received her ballot.
The husband, a Republican, did not.
He waited several days before requesting a replacement.
Winn helped him navigate that process, and the replacement eventually arrived.
She said the experience was one of several mixed-party household complaints.
Other families reported that some Republicans received ballots while others in the same household did not.
Winn questioned whether the pattern reflected more than ordinary administrative mistakes.
But she acknowledged that Democratic voters experiencing similar problems would be unlikely to contact her.
That limitation prevents the reported cases from establishing deliberate partisan discrimination.
Changes to Early-Voting Registration Add to the Confusion
Winn described two voters she had personally helped enroll for early ballots in July.
According to her account, the registration process was completed and confirmation received.
Nevertheless, neither voter received the expected ballot for the general election.
She also described an individual whose party registration appeared different from what the voter expected.
Winn said she was working to resolve each situation.
Her broader criticism was that voters should not have to repeatedly verify registrations that were previously completed successfully.
Smith Says College Voting Patterns Have Changed Arizona Politics
Smith argued that college communities have become an increasingly significant source of Democratic votes in Arizona.
He traced part of the trend to changes in residency and voting rules dating to the late 1970s.
In his view, allowing students to register where they attend college helped change the political character of communities such as Flagstaff, Tempe and Tucson.
He alleged that some students may have voted in both their home states and their college communities.
The discussion did not provide evidence establishing widespread double voting, and lawful student registration at a college address does not itself constitute misconduct.
Smith's larger point was that universities now represent important political constituencies.
He argued that Republican campaigns must recognize that reality when planning turnout operations.
Republican Turnout Has Historically Lagged During Midterms
Smith said Republicans cannot assume presidential-election participation will continue automatically during a midterm.
Voters who supported Trump may become less motivated when he is not on the ballot.
That creates opportunities for Democratic candidates.
Smith urged conservative voters to treat the current election as consequential regardless of whether the presidency is being contested.
He encouraged them to contact friends and neighbors rather than assume party organizations could handle every turnout effort.
Marana's Political Direction Becomes Part of Smith's Argument
Smith contrasted Tucson's political leadership with the Town of Marana.
He praised Marana's local government and defended its approach to economic development.
He also criticized opposition to proposed data centers and immigration detention facilities.
Smith argued that data-center proposals should be evaluated according to their actual demands on water and electricity rather than rejected automatically.
He also defended detention facilities as part of federal immigration-enforcement operations, including the processing of people entitled to applicable legal procedures.
His comments reflected a strongly conservative perspective on immigration policy and local development.
Winn agreed that local governments should prioritize economic opportunity and public safety.
Both criticized Pima County's temporary moratorium on data-center development.
University of Arizona Receives a New Ballot Drop Box
Winn and Smith questioned a newly announced ballot drop box at the University of Arizona.
According to information Winn reviewed, the Recorder's Office announced the addition early on October 22.
The new drop box was described as available around the clock, with additional early-voting services on specified dates.
Winn's concern was not that university students should be denied access to voting.
It was why the county could add a new location near campus while other communities had fewer available services.
Early Voting Hours at the University
Winn read the schedule announced for the new university location.
The early-voting site was scheduled to operate in the Student Union's third-floor Santa Cruz Room from October 26 through October 29, generally between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m.
On Friday, October 30, the hours were extended to 7 p.m.
Winn also reported emergency-voting hours on October 31 and November 2.
The university site would not operate as an Election Day voting center.
Instead, she identified a nearby location at 915 East Fourth Street, scheduled to serve voters on November 3 from 6 a.m. until 7 p.m.
Those were the schedules Winn reported at the time; voters should confirm current hours and services through Pima County's official election information.
Winn Questions the Distribution of Voting Locations
Winn contrasted the university's new services with reductions in voting locations serving Green Valley.
She also criticized the absence of a regular early-voting center and ballot drop box within Marana.
For Winn, the difference raised questions about how election officials selected locations.
Smith speculated that Democratic officials were attempting to increase participation among university students.
Neither presented evidence that the new drop box was created to favor one political party.
Nevertheless, Winn argued that decisions about voter access should be transparent and justified according to community needs.
Proposition 425 and the Cost of Pima County Government
Winn and Smith devoted part of their discussion to Proposition 425.
The measure would permanently increase Pima County's constitutional expenditure base, allowing a substantial expansion of its legal spending limit.
Winn opposed the proposal, arguing that county officials should demonstrate better financial management before requesting additional spending authority.
She cited estimates of hundreds of millions of dollars in additional annual spending capacity.
That expanded authority would not automatically impose a tax increase or require the county to spend the entire amount.
But Winn and Smith believe the change could create pressure for future revenue increases.
The County's Unspent Funds Raise Questions About Priorities
Winn referred to approximately $18 million that county supervisors were considering allocating.
She criticized what she perceived as an urgency to spend the money rather than save it or consider tax relief.
Smith agreed.
Both argued that residents are struggling with housing costs, property taxes and other household expenses.
They believe officials should respond with spending discipline rather than a permanent expansion of the constitutional limit.
Bipartisan Opposition Becomes a Political Opportunity
Winn emphasized that opposition to Proposition 425 included Democrats as well as Republicans.
She viewed that cooperation as evidence that fiscal restraint can cross partisan boundaries.
Smith agreed that taxpayers with different political beliefs may share concerns about rising government costs.
Both criticized supervisors whom they believe have failed to prioritize roads, public safety and economic development.
Smith was especially critical of Supervisor Andres Cano and other members of the Democratic majority.
He also referred to allegations that Cano used taxpayer money for politically themed T-shirts.
Those allegations remained separate from any finding of criminal or administrative wrongdoing.
Joel Strabala: Missing-Ballot Voters Still Have Time to Act
Joel Strabala, a member of the Pima County Election Integrity Commission and chairman of the Legislative District 17 Republican organization, provided specific instructions for residents who had not received their early ballots.
Strabala emphasized that voters should not wait for a general investigation to determine why ballots were missing.
The deadline for requesting an early ballot by mail was approaching.
Affected residents needed to check their records and act before the opportunity expired.
How to Check Early-Voting Registration
Strabala directed voters to recorder.pima.gov or PimaVotes.com.
He explained that both resources could lead voters to the registration dashboard.
The dashboard allows individuals to examine information associated with their voter registration.
Access requires identifying information, including a name, date of birth and other authentication details.
Once inside, voters can determine whether they are enrolled on the Active Early Voting List.
Eligible voters can then review options for requesting a ballot.
Strabala said people who believed they had already enrolled should verify that their records actually reflected that status.
October 23 at 5 p.m. Was the Request Deadline
Strabala confirmed that voters had until 5 p.m. on Friday, October 23, to request an early ballot by mail.
He also provided a Recorder's Office telephone number: 520-724-4330.
Winn emphasized that the deadline applied to requests for ballots to be mailed to voters.
It was not the final opportunity to vote.
People who missed the deadline could still use authorized in-person voting options.
Strabala recommended early in-person voting for anyone worried about another postal delay.
Voters Should Not Depend on a Replacement Arriving at the Last Minute
Strabala argued that voting in person eliminates the uncertainty of waiting for another ballot to arrive in the mail.
A voter can visit an authorized early-voting site, follow the identification procedures and cast a ballot according to the applicable rules.
"For those that don't have their ballot in hand or are unable to get one sent in the mail, I strongly encourage you to go to an early voting site and vote in person," Strabala said.
He emphasized that voting early can also provide time to address certain processing questions before Election Day.
His recommendation was practical rather than investigative.
Whatever caused the mailing problem, eligible voters still needed a reliable way to participate.
Strabala Questions the Mobile Voting Center's Reliability
Winn asked Strabala about Pima County's mobile voting center.
The county uses a trailer-based facility transported to communities that may lack convenient permanent voting locations.
Winn said the trailer depends on a separate truck for transportation.
She referred to an earlier incident in which a mechanical problem reportedly delayed the mobile center by approximately three and a half hours during a five-hour scheduled visit.
The location may therefore have been available for only a fraction of the promised time.
Is the Mobile Unit Delivering Enough Value?
Strabala said he did not possess a complete accounting of the mobile center's performance during the primary.
He estimated that fewer than 1,000 ballots may have been processed across approximately five operating days.
He did not present a verified figure.
Winn questioned whether the vehicle's cost, staffing and logistical requirements were justified by that level of participation.
She also asked whether the county had adequate contingency plans when the towing vehicle broke down.
The underlying concern was reliability.
Residents traveling to a scheduled voting location should be able to expect it to operate during the published hours.
Marana Remains a Major Concern
Winn and Strabala discussed Marana's population and the absence of a regular early-voting center or ballot drop box within the town.
Strabala estimated the area served tens of thousands of registered voters.
He questioned why residents should need to travel to Oro Valley or elsewhere to use certain services.
Winn contrasted that situation with the new University of Arizona drop box and several existing downtown Tucson locations.
She argued that voting resources should be distributed according to population and practical access rather than political considerations.
Who Approves a New Ballot Drop Box?
Winn asked whether the Recorder could create new ballot drop-box locations without approval from the Board of Supervisors.
Strabala said he believed board approval might be necessary but acknowledged that he had not researched the governing requirements fully.
"My understanding, and it's more of an opinion without supporting facts, is they should be approved via the Pima County Board of Supervisors," he said.
Winn said she did not remember seeing the university location discussed at a board meeting.
Neither established that the addition was unauthorized.
The exchange highlighted a question they wanted county officials to answer: which office has authority to establish ballot drop boxes, and what procedures govern those decisions?
Seventeen Early-Voting Sites Were Expected to Operate the Following Week
Strabala said the county's early-voting network was scheduled to expand beginning Monday, October 26.
He expected approximately 17 early-voting sites to operate across Pima County.
Winn encouraged voters with completed early ballots to use authorized locations where they could request voluntary identification verification.
She described returning her own ballot and receiving confirmation that it had been processed.
She viewed the experience as evidence that parts of the system were functioning efficiently despite the mailing complaints.
LD17 Participation Still Needed Improvement
Winn and Strabala also examined turnout in Legislative District 17.
Strabala said approximately 8,900 ballots had been returned by Tuesday morning.
Winn then checked more recent information and reported approximately 11,702 returned ballots, representing about 25 percent under the measure she was reviewing.
She compared the district with Legislative District 19, where the comparable figure was approximately 31.5 percent.
The numbers came from the election data the speakers were consulting at that point and were not independently reconciled during the discussion.
Winn said Republicans in LD17 needed to improve participation substantially.
For Strabala, the priority was ensuring that people who wanted to vote did not remain at home because of a mailing problem.
Alex Kolodin: Pima County's Ballot Problems Appear More Widespread Than Elsewhere
State Representative Alex Kolodin, the Republican candidate for Arizona Secretary of State, said the reports from Pima County were unusual compared with what he was hearing across the rest of Arizona.
He acknowledged sporadic complaints in Maricopa County.
But he said the concentration of cases appeared much greater in Pima County.
"It certainly seems like Pima County has been more impacted than anywhere else in the state," Kolodin said.
For him, that raised questions about county-level procedures and the Secretary of State's responsibility for statewide election administration.
Congressman Juan Ciscomani's Missing Ballot Illustrates the Problem
Kolodin referred to reports that Congressman Juan Ciscomani had not received his expected early ballot.
He considered the situation extraordinary.
If a sitting member of Congress could experience difficulties receiving a ballot, Kolodin argued, ordinary voters might face the same problem without having access to political staff or public attention.
The issue was especially significant because Ciscomani was seeking reelection in a competitive congressional district.
Kolodin characterized the mailing failures as evidence that Arizona's election administration needed stronger oversight.
Kolodin Blames Secretary of State Adrian Fontes
Kolodin argued that Fontes bears responsibility for statewide procedures governing the production and distribution of ballots.
County election officials perform many of the operational tasks, but Kolodin believes the Secretary of State must provide clear rules and ensure that systems are functioning properly.
He accused Fontes of prioritizing politics over administrative competence.
Those accusations reflected Kolodin's assessment as an opposing candidate.
The discussion did not establish that Fontes personally caused the reported ballot-delivery problems.
But Kolodin argued that officials should identify the cause rather than leave voters uncertain.
Kolodin Raises the Possibility of Problems With Runbeck Election Services
One of the most significant developments came when Winn located Pima County documentation involving Runbeck Election Services.
She cited a February 17, 2026, Board of Supervisors agenda that listed an approximately $5 million contract involving the vendor.
According to Winn's description, the agreement covered ballot production, assembly and mailing or delivery services.
The precise contract terms were not independently reviewed during the discussion.
Nevertheless, the finding introduced another possible point in the ballot-distribution process where investigators might look for problems.
Ballot Production Requires Multiple Organizations
Kolodin explained that elections often involve private vendors performing functions traditionally associated with public administration.
A company may print ballots, assemble mailing packets and transfer them into the postal system.
Those responsibilities are essential to conducting an election.
Kolodin argued that the state should establish clear procedures governing those contractors.
He criticized what he sees as insufficient statewide oversight.
"One of the things that Adrian Fontes has failed to do ... he's failed to prescribe rules governing third-party election vendors," Kolodin said.
His criticism was that private companies should not operate under less explicit election safeguards simply because they are contractors.
The Contract Could Help Identify Where Ballots Were Lost
Winn suggested reviewing the number of ballot packets ordered, produced, rejected, reprinted, held and accepted by the Postal Service.
Those figures could help determine whether the total number of ballots entering the delivery process matched the county's records.
The questions are important because a ballot recorded as mailed may pass through several operational stages.
An error in address data, printing, assembly, transfer or postal delivery could produce different outcomes.
Kolodin agreed that vendor records could be relevant.
But the discussion did not establish that Runbeck caused the missing ballots.
The identification of a vendor is not evidence of misconduct.
Kolodin Proposes Stronger Vendor Regulations
Kolodin said he would establish clearer rules for private companies performing election-related functions if elected Secretary of State.
"We're going to make sure that if you're fulfilling an elections-related function, whether you're a private vendor or a public entity, that you're bound by rules that protect Arizona voters," he said.
His proposal would treat contractor oversight as part of the state's responsibility to administer elections.
Winn supported that approach.
She argued that voters should not need to understand a complex chain of vendors and government agencies to determine why a ballot was not delivered.
Kolodin Says Pima County Republican Turnout Could Decide Statewide Races
Kolodin connected the missing-ballot reports to election participation.
According to the figures he discussed, Republican turnout in Pima County was running approximately five percentage points behind the comparable point in the 2022 election.
Statewide Republican participation, he said, was ahead of the corresponding 2022 level.
He considered that disparity significant because several statewide races were competitive.
Pima County Votes Affect Statewide Totals
Kolodin emphasized that Republican voters should not become discouraged simply because Pima County often votes Democratic.
A Republican ballot still contributes to the statewide total.
Even when a party loses a county, reducing the opposing party's margin can determine the statewide result.
Kolodin believes Pima County Republicans are therefore essential to his own campaign and other statewide Republican races.
"Pima County Republicans are running almost five points behind their turnout for the 2022 general election at this same stage," he said.
His recommendation was to make up that difference through aggressive early participation.
The ACLU's Reported Spending Draws Kolodin's Attention
Kolodin also claimed that the American Civil Liberties Union had committed approximately $500,000 to the Secretary of State race.
According to his account, roughly half supported Fontes and half opposed Kolodin.
He argued that substantial outside spending demonstrated the importance political organizations attached to the contest.
The figures were Kolodin's description and were not independently verified during the discussion.
He said Fontes was already outspending him significantly.
Nevertheless, Kolodin expressed confidence that Republican turnout could overcome the financial difference.
Reports Were Referred to Federal Authorities
Kolodin said the Pima County ballot-delivery concerns had been reported to the FBI.
He expressed hope that federal investigators would examine the situation.
The discussion did not establish that a formal FBI investigation had begun or what conclusions investigators might reach.
Kolodin emphasized that a potential investigation would not repair a missing ballot before the election.
Voters needed to use the lawful options available immediately.
"If you haven't gotten your ballot yet, stop waiting around for it," he said.
He encouraged residents to locate an early in-person voting site, bring appropriate identification and contact the Pima County Republican Party if they needed assistance with transportation.
Proposition 144 and the Debate Over Faster Election Results
Kolodin and Winn also discussed Proposition 144.
Winn supported the measure, describing its objectives as faster, more accurate, secure and transparent election results.
She argued that election procedures should produce outcomes voters can understand and trust.
Kolodin shared her criticism of the current administration.
Both believe improvements in election technology, ballot processing and clear procedural rules are necessary.
Winn also encouraged voters to support the statewide propositions referred by Arizona's Republican-controlled Legislature.
Her recommendation reflected her partisan position rather than an examination of each proposition's complete legal consequences.
Jack Dona: Election-System Errors Should Be Examined Like Engineering Failures
Retired Master Sergeant Jack Dona joined Winn with a more expansive critique of Arizona's election infrastructure.
Dona has participated in research examining voter registration, ballot custody and election-administration procedures.
He believes recurring technical and procedural problems should be analyzed as interconnected failures rather than isolated mistakes.
His background influences the way he approaches elections.
An engineering system should have clear requirements, documented processes, quality controls and identifiable responsibilities.
When problems occur, investigators should determine whether the system operated according to its design.
Dona argues that election administrators frequently rely on explanations involving software glitches, mechanical breakdowns and human error without adequately addressing recurring patterns.
Dona Believes Some Problems May Be Deliberate
Dona's criticism went beyond incompetence.
He alleged that some errors may be intentionally introduced into election systems.
"I believe this is deliberate," he said.
He described what he calls "process engineering errors" that, in his interpretation, can be exploited to affect elections.
That was Dona's allegation, not an independently established finding of coordinated election manipulation.
The discussion did not provide evidence demonstrating that officials designed the systems to alter election outcomes.
Nevertheless, Dona argued that the repetition of problems warrants more comprehensive review.
Why Dona Questions Modern Election Technology
Dona compared contemporary electronic systems with earlier methods of administering elections.
He said American communities once counted ballots by hand within individual precincts.
Today, many jurisdictions rely on electronic poll books, automated tabulators and multiple software systems.
Those technologies can improve efficiency, but Dona believes they also create opportunities for errors that are difficult for ordinary voters to identify.
His objection was not simply that technology exists.
It was that election officials must be able to demonstrate that each stage functions correctly.
He argued that greater technological complexity should be accompanied by stronger auditing and more transparent procedures.
Dona Questions Whether Election Problems Consistently Affect One Political Party
Dona said the reports from Pima County resembled other election disputes he had examined.
He questioned why Republican voters appeared disproportionately represented among the missing-ballot complaints.
Winn acknowledged an important limitation.
Because she chairs the Republican Party, Republicans are more likely to contact her.
She cannot determine the overall partisan distribution of missing ballots from the complaints reaching her office.
Dona nevertheless argued that officials should examine the full data set and determine whether measurable disparities exist.
That would require comparing affected voters by registration status, geography, mailing records and other relevant characteristics.
Without those records, the anecdotal pattern cannot establish deliberate suppression.
Dona Criticizes Explanations Involving Moving or Holidays
Winn repeated her objection to the suggestion that voters had failed to update addresses after moving.
She said the 62 residents she personally helped reported no change in residence.
Dona also criticized an explanation involving the Columbus Day holiday.
He noted that ballots began going out before the October 12 holiday.
In his view, the timing required a more precise explanation than a general reference to postal schedules.
Neither speaker demonstrated that postal operations had no role in the missing deliveries.
But they argued that officials should provide specific records supporting their explanation.
The University of Arizona Drop Box Becomes Another Concern
Dona shared Winn's questions about the new University of Arizona drop box.
He contrasted the addition with reductions in voting locations in Green Valley and the lack of a regular early-voting site in Marana.
He questioned whether the differing services reflected administrative planning or political considerations.
The discussion did not establish that the location decisions were unlawful or intentionally partisan.
Dona nevertheless argued that county officials should explain their site-selection process and the legal authority used to establish new facilities.
Dona Also Raises Separate Allegations About Ilhan Omar
Dona and Winn briefly moved beyond Arizona elections to discuss disputed allegations involving Representative Ilhan Omar and her family's immigration history.
They questioned claims about Omar's marriage history and her father's immigration records.
Dona speculated that members of Omar's family may have entered the United States under questionable circumstances.
He also suggested that records could be missing or incomplete.
Those were unverified allegations and speculation. The discussion did not establish immigration fraud, unlawful citizenship or wrongdoing by Omar or her relatives.
The guests nevertheless used the controversy to argue that government eligibility requirements and public records should be administered consistently.
For Dona, the issue reflected his broader concern that official systems can contain inaccuracies that are difficult for citizens to investigate.
Election Administration Is Becoming a National Story
Winn said the Pima County ballot controversy had attracted attention from national conservative media outlets.
She referred to coverage or discussion involving The Gateway Pundit, The Epoch Times, commentator Steve Bannon, journalist Rachel Alexander and broadcaster Garrett Lewis.
She had also discussed the issue publicly herself.
Winn argued that the national attention demonstrated the seriousness of the concerns.
But publicity does not establish the validity of every allegation.
The central unresolved questions remained practical: how many ballots were affected, where the process failed and what could be done to ensure eligible voters participated before the deadline.
The Records Needed to Resolve the Controversy
The guest discussions identified several categories of information that could help clarify the situation.
Election officials could compare ballot requests with voter-registration records and Active Early Voting List enrollment.
Ballot-production records could show how many packets were printed, rejected or reprinted.
Vendor records could establish when completed ballots were transferred for mailing.
Postal acceptance information could help determine whether expected shipments entered the delivery system.
Replacement-ballot records could show how affected voters resolved their problems.
Such a review would distinguish isolated address errors from larger operational failures.
It could also test allegations of partisan disparities rather than relying exclusively on individual reports.
Participation Remains the Immediate Priority
Despite their different explanations for the problems, Winn's guests agreed on the practical importance of voting.
Fox urged citizens to exercise independent judgment rather than follow ideological fashion.
Smith called on Republicans to participate even when they were frustrated with candidates or election administration.
Strabala explained the procedures available for requesting or replacing early ballots.
Kolodin emphasized in-person voting as a way to avoid further delivery uncertainty.
Dona argued that the systems should be examined and officials held accountable for documented failures.
The recommendations were not identical, but they reflected a shared concern that unresolved administrative questions should not prevent eligible voters from participating.
The November Election Will Shape Arizona's Government
Winn connected turnout to the contest between Republican gubernatorial candidate Andy Biggs and Democratic Governor Katie Hobbs.
She described the race as highly competitive.
She also highlighted Congressman Juan Ciscomani's reelection effort in Arizona's Sixth Congressional District.
In her assessment, Republican participation in Pima County could determine whether Ciscomani wins statewide and districtwide support sufficient to overcome Democratic margins.
Winn also urged voters to examine local propositions.
She opposes Proposition 425 and supports Proposition 144.
Those positions reflect her political priorities and the Republican Party's approach to the election.
Government Accountability Does Not End on Election Day
The disputes discussed by Fox, Smith, Strabala, Kolodin and Dona raise questions that will remain relevant after November 3.
Parents will continue debating educational and athletic policies.
County officials will still be responsible for public spending and election services.
Private vendors will continue performing essential government functions.
And election administrators will need to reconcile voting records, investigate documented problems and explain their procedures to the public.
The health of representative government depends not only on the opportunity to vote but also on the integrity of the institutions administering that right.
For Pima County residents still waiting for ballots, the approaching deadline made the immediate decision clear: verify registration information, contact election officials when necessary and use an authorized voting option.
For elected officials, the responsibility is equally clear. They must identify what went wrong, demonstrate what worked and provide the evidence necessary for citizens to evaluate the system.
Public confidence is not created by demanding that voters trust government. It is earned through reliable administration, transparent records and accountability when things fail.