← Election Series · All statewide races

Our verdict

LiberalMind endorses Kevin Thompson and Ralph Heap for the two Corporation Commission seats — Thompson as the proven incumbent, Heap as unproven for this office, and on watch

Election Day is November 3. This race elects two of the five commissioners who set Arizona's private utility rates — and voters vote for up to two candidates, so our call names two names. Five candidates are in it: an incumbent Republican whose signature claims are his own campaign's and unverified, a Republican state representative with no utility-regulation record at all, two Democrats running as a duo, and a Green candidate whose very ballot status — printed or write-in — the sources do not agree on, a gap we print rather than resolve. No public polling for this race was located, and no finance totals for any of the five were located. All five sitting commissioners are Republicans, so these two seats cannot by themselves flip the commission — a Democratic sweep would cut the majority to 3–2. LiberalMind endorses Kevin Thompson and Ralph Heap for the two seats. Read the research, and see why one of those names is proven and the other is, explicitly, unproven and on watch.

How Arizona got here

The five-member Corporation Commission regulates private utilities — electric, gas, water and wastewater rates — as well as business incorporation, securities, and railroad and pipeline safety. Commissioners serve staggered four-year terms, are elected statewide, and are capped at two consecutive terms (Tucson Spotlight). Two seats are on the November 3 ballot, both currently held by Republicans; all five seats are currently Republican-held (Generation 180; Tucson Spotlight). Voters vote for up to two candidates.

The primaries winnowed both parties' fields — and eliminated a sitting chairman. In the multi-seat Republican primary, Kevin Thompson (incumbent) took 325,029 votes (35.8%) and Ralph Heap took 299,319 (33.0%) to win the two nominations; Chairman Nick Myers (incumbent), 283,126 (31.2%), was eliminated (Wikipedia, 2026 Arizona Corporation Commission election). Heap and David Marshall had run as more-conservative challengers charging that Myers and Thompson were "insufficiently supportive of President Donald Trump's agenda"; Marshall ended his campaign April 21, 2026 and resigned his state House seat after being appointed Navajo County Recorder (same). One of the two seats on this ballot is therefore open in effect — Myers's — though both are filled from this five-candidate field. In the Democratic primary, Clara Pratte took 432,609 (53.4%) and Jonathon Hill took 377,925 (46.6%), running as a duo (same). The Green, Mike Cease, won his party's primary as a write-in with 213 votes (same).

Cease's ballot status is a print-critical ambiguity, and we print it as one: general-election coverage in the Arizona Republic and the Tucson Spotlight describes him as a write-in candidate, while Wikipedia's general-election table and the Maricopa County ballot compilation list him among the candidates without that label. Whether his name is printed on the general ballot or he remains a declared write-in was not resolved against the Secretary of State's list in this research. We do not settle it here.

Competitiveness evidence: no ratings and no public polling for this race were located — the article says so. The documented stakes are the commission's own 2026 record: in 2026 the commission voted to repeal the 2006 Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff (REST) rules, and its adoption of formula rates for utilities is being challenged by organizations active in this race (Lutheran Advocacy Ministry summary; Arizona Republic forum coverage, Oct. 2, 2026). Pending Tucson Electric Power and APS rate requests frame the affordability issue (Tucson Spotlight). Money: no candidate finance totals were located for any of the five candidates — the gap is printed, not filled. One process fact: Thompson skipped the October 2 candidate forum, telling the Republic he "didn't have anything to gain" and wanted to avoid the appearance of impropriety because host organizations are challenging the commission's formula-rate decision (Arizona Republic) — his stated reason, printed as his statement.

Kevin Thompson (Republican) — the incumbent, whose numbers are his own

Background and service: Commissioner since 2023 — a proven record in this office. An Air Force veteran (Desert Storm), from his Clean Elections candidate statement (FOX 10) — campaign-supplied biography, labeled as such.

His claims, printed at exactly their sourced strength: His candidate statement claims he "championed the elimination of previously enacted Commission mandates that… cost[] ratepayers nearly $4 Billion," "led the charge in eliminating over $50 Million in ratepayer surcharges," and that "Arizona's grid is now ranked the 7th most reliable in the country." All three are campaign claims from his own statement, not independently verified in this research — signature claims included, because our endorsement-diligence rule verifies the endorsee's signature claims with the same rigor as an opponent's attacks, and the honest verdict here is unverified, in both directions: we do not print the $4 billion, the $50 million, or the reliability rank as fact, and we do not print them as false, either. They are his statement of his term, awaiting the verification the record located does not contain. His stated race frame is reliability and affordability, and his position is that residents should judge the commission by their year-round bills (Arizona Republic). The commission he sits on did, on the documented record, vote in 2026 to repeal the 2006 renewable-energy standard rules and adopt the formula rates now under legal challenge (Lutheran Advocacy Ministry; Arizona Republic) — institutional acts of the body he serves on, printed as such.

Pros: The only proven incumbent in the field for either seat: a term on the commission itself, in a race where regulatory experience is the scarcest commodity on the ballot. The documented direction of the commission he serves on — repealing a 2006 mandate regime, moving on rate structure — is the market-side direction our values favor for a rate-setting body. His forum absence came with a stated propriety reason tied to live litigation over the commission's own decision, printed above for readers to weigh.

Cons: His three signature claims are unverified campaign claims, and under endorsement diligence that gap prices against him — an endorsement from us is not a certification of numbers we could not check. He skipped the one forum in the record. He survived his own primary with 35.8% in a three-way field in which the party's chairman was eliminated for alleged insufficient loyalty to the President's agenda — the shape of his party's verdict on the sitting commission, printed as the primary record it is.

The flaw, plainly: Unverified signature claims — the own-promise species, at the "stated but not checked" weight — plus a skipped forum. No conduct flaw in service was sourced against him in this file.

Ralph Heap (Republican) — the challenger who beat a chairman, unproven for this office

Background and service: A state representative from the Mesa area who ran with David Marshall as the Trump-aligned challenger slate against the incumbent commissioners (Wikipedia). The LD23 Republican voter guide lists Heap among the party's statewide nominees. He has no utility-regulation record located in this research — unproven for this office, and we price him exactly that way in the call.

Pros: He won a real contest: 299,319 primary votes and the elimination of a sitting commission chairman is a demonstrated political record, and his candidacy represents the Republican electorate's stated demand for a commission more aligned with the President's agenda — a direction question this office answers every rate case. He runs in-tent.

Cons: Unproven is the whole file on the regulatory side: no rate case, no utility record, no located finance totals, no located polling — there is nothing in this research to grade about how he would actually regulate. A voter choosing him is choosing direction and party judgment over demonstrated regulatory work, and the article should not pretend otherwise.

The flaw, plainly: None proven — because nothing is proven. Insufficient record, stated plainly: unproven for this office is a watch-closely posture, never a demerit, and never by itself the reason to withhold an endorsement — but it is the reason our endorsement of him carries the watch language in the call line itself.

The Democratic duo and the Green candidate, briefly and fairly

Clara Pratte (D) — former director of the Office of Native American Affairs at the U.S. Small Business Administration (Wikipedia). She grew up on the Navajo Nation (Tsé Si Ani) in a home without running water or electricity until she was in middle school — the stated basis of her campaign against utility rate increases (Tucson Spotlight, from her campaign). That biography is a genuinely powerful file for a utilities race, and we steelman it as such: a commissioner who has lived without the services the commission prices understands the stakes of a rate case in a way no résumé teaches. She is running as a duo with Hill (Wikipedia). No in-service record of breaks with her party was located — she has not held this or a comparable elected office — so the Manchin exception has no service record to attach to in her file either. Jonathon Hill (D) — a researcher at Arizona State University's Mars Space Flight Facility; he was a nominee for Corporation Commission in 2024, making this his second consecutive run for the office (Wikipedia); he appears on the Arizona AFL-CIO's 2026 endorsement list. Persistence and a scientific career are real; a record of utility regulation, or of breaks with his party in service, was not located. Mike Cease (Green) — secretary of the Arizona Green Party; nominee for Corporation Commission in 2024; qualified via write-in votes in both cycles (Wikipedia). A record beyond party office was not located — and, per the note above, whether his name is printed on this ballot or he remains a write-in is unresolved in the sources, a gap we print rather than settle. A standing check found no pedophile-association material meeting the proven standard for any candidate in this race — absence noted, nothing implied.

OUR CALL

LiberalMind endorses Kevin Thompson and Ralph Heap for the two Corporation Commission seats — Thompson as the proven incumbent, Heap as unproven for this office, and on watch.

A vote-for-two race requires a slate call, and we make it as one decision with two different evidentiary weights, stated openly. Seat one is Thompson's file: the only proven commissioner in the race, serving on a commission whose documented 2026 direction — repealing the 2006 renewable-mandate rules, restructuring rates — runs with the free-market grain of this office, carrying the priced flaw that his three signature savings-and-reliability claims are his own campaign's and unverified; we endorse the direction and the incumbency, and we explicitly do not certify the numbers. Seat two is the harder judgment, and it is the one we flag as such: between Heap — unproven for this office, with nothing regulatory in his file to grade — and the Democratic duo, the doctrine decides it. Neither Pratte nor Hill has an in-service record that could earn the Manchin exception, and a commission seat held by a party-standard Democrat moves a currently 5–0 body toward the regulatory direction Arizona's voters have spent two cycles voting against; Heap is the in-tent candidate whose primary voters already rendered their own verdict on the sitting commission's direction. Unproven status is a posture, not a demerit. Endorse the slate — the proven incumbent and the unproven challenger, on watch — with the second seat's thinness printed in the call rather than buried under it.

For the complete Election 2026 breakdown — every race, claim by claim — see the full coverage on our website.

Vote early. Research your candidates. Choose the best moderates, whatever their party — no extremism from either side. And encourage your friends and family to do the same.

Sources

Election result — November 4, 2026

Result pending. No verified call (Associated Press or official) as of November 4, 2026. This page will be updated when the race is called or certified. The original article above is unchanged.

AI-assisted article — but the sources are human, and the facts are very real.

← Back to the Election Series