(The Center Square) – Arizona is the 20th most dependent state that relies on the federal government, according to a new report.
The Center for Practical Federalism recently released the report detailing how reliant states are on federal officials.
Steve Johnson, a fellow at CPF, told The Center Square this week that rankings are based on measurements of how states are “doing in terms of policies and practices to protect [themselves] against federal overreach.”
Johnson described Arizona’s ranking as “middle of the pack,” saying the state had an overall “slightly above average score.”
The 2025 rankings mark the third year CPF has conducted a federalism scorecard, Johnson stated.
Arizona’s rankings have fallen since 2023, when it ranked as the 11th most resilient to federal influence. In 2024, Arizona ranked 22nd among the most vulnerable states to federal influence.
According to Johnson, a large portion of Arizona’s budget comes from federal dollars. The Arizona Center for Economic Progress said in fiscal year 2025, 45% of the state’s revenue came from federal funds.
Johnson, who served three terms in the Michigan state House, said there is “a lot of room for improvement.” However, he said this may be difficult because Arizona has a Democratic governor and a Republican-controlled Legislature.
Arizona state government officials should be asking themselves whether they are “protecting the interests” of their citizens when accepting federal funds, Johnson noted.
He said many state bureaucrats will be “aligned” with a bigger government because “their jobs are funded by federal dollars.”
These bureaucrats view their role as not fighting with the federal government, Johnson said. “They’ll often just do what the federal government will ask them.”
The report had eight categories: oversight committees, non-judicial deference, agency lobby restricted, legislative regulatory review, independent regulatory review, injunctive relief for citizens, null and void statutes, and legislative subpoena power.
CPF gave states color rankings: red, yellow and green. The red color meant a state was “unprotected against agency influence,” whereas yellow meant “vulnerable” and green meant “stronger-than-average.”
Arizona received a red rating in oversight committees, legislative regulatory review and injunctive relief for citizens.
To improve its score, Arizona needs to increase legislative involvement in the regulatory process, Johnson told The Center Square. He recommended more legislators get involved in government oversight and ask if specific rules are necessary.
Johnson said Arizona doesn’t currently have such a legislative oversight committee. He said the addition of that committee would help the Legislature to be a better check on the federal government.
For injunctive relief for citizens, every state besides Tennessee scored a red. Johnson said Tennessee is the only state that allows citizens to immediately seek an injunction against a state government action.
An example of a situation in which a citizen could use this relief is when a governor uses emergency powers to shut down businesses during a pandemic, Johnson said.
He noted CPF advocates for limiting the power of the state bureaucracy and “putting guardrails on it, especially surrounding legislative oversight.”
“We don’t want a situation where unelected bureaucrats are doing what they’re told by the feds,” Johnson said.
CPF supports the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act, Johnson said, adding that it “requires legislative approval of any major regulations.”
The House passed the REINS Act in 2023, but the legislation has lingered in the Senate.
Besides backing the REINS Act, CPF supports legislative approval before a state applies for federal grants, Johnson said.
The organization wants to make sure “state legislatures are more involved in that process and they’re aware of [what] they’re agreeing to,” he said.
CPF also wants states to have a contingency plan when they lose federal funds. Johnson said the organization doesn’t want states to be so dependent on federal funds that they will do whatever the federal government asks.
If states have a contingency plan, they are “more likely in a situation” where they push back against the federal government, he said.
