Republican Says Democrat Afraid of Math

Republican congressional candidate Jay Feely is criticizing Democratic opponent Amish Shah over his absence from recent candidate forums, arguing that Arizona voters deserve more opportunities to hear both candidates explain their positions on the economy, healthcare and federal spending.

Feely and Shah are competing for the open U.S. House seat in Arizona’s 1st Congressional District, which includes Scottsdale, parts of Phoenix and several surrounding communities.

The disagreement over public appearances is becoming another issue in the closely watched congressional race.

Feely Questions Shah’s Absence From Candidate Forums

Shah declined an invitation to participate in an Arizona PBS candidate appearance and also did not participate in another forum to which both candidates had been invited.

Feely has used those absences to question whether Shah is willing to publicly defend his policy positions and explain how major government programs would be financed.

During an appearance on Newsmax’s “Saturday Agenda,” Feely argued that Democratic candidates around the country often promote expansive government programs without providing enough detail about their long-term costs.

“I think he’s afraid of math,” Feely said of Shah.

Feely continued by arguing that promising government benefits is easier than explaining how taxpayers would ultimately pay for them.

Those comments represent Feely’s campaign argument and his characterization of Shah’s policy positions.

Healthcare Spending Becomes a Key Campaign Issue

Feely pointed specifically to healthcare as an example of the broader spending debate.

Proposals such as Medicare for All have previously generated estimates involving tens of trillions of dollars in additional federal spending over a 10-year period, although estimates vary considerably depending on the proposal, assumptions and financing structure.

Feely argued that candidates supporting large-scale government healthcare programs should explain how those programs would be funded.

“They can’t tell you how you’re going to pay for it,” Feely said. “They just want to promise that they’re going to give it to you.”

Supporters of universal healthcare proposals have argued that federal spending estimates should also account for money currently spent by individuals, employers and governments on premiums, deductibles and other healthcare costs.

The competing arguments illustrate a broader disagreement over whether healthcare should rely more heavily on private insurance or government-funded coverage.

Bernie Sanders Connection Draws Attention

Feely is also highlighting Shah’s past support for Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who has long advocated for Medicare for All and other progressive economic policies.

Feely argues that Shah’s previous association with Sanders raises questions about Shah’s current effort to present himself as a moderate Democrat.

“My opponent tries to present himself as a moderate,” Feely said.

Feely also claimed that Shah has supported Sanders and progressive political causes for years.

Shah’s own current policy positions, rather than campaign characterizations from either side, will ultimately provide voters with the clearest basis for evaluating where he stands on major economic and government spending issues.

Feely Says Socialist Policies Are Unpopular in the District

Feely also argued that policies associated with democratic socialism are not popular with many voters in Arizona’s 1st Congressional District.

“People in Arizona, specifically the 1st Congressional District, they care about the economy,” Feely said.

He described the district as economically successful and argued that its voters are skeptical of policies that substantially expand government control over the economy.

Feely also criticized socialist economic systems more broadly, pointing to countries such as Venezuela and Cuba as examples of governments where socialist or communist policies produced poor economic outcomes.

The comparison is part of Feely’s campaign argument and remains politically contested, particularly because democratic socialist proposals in the United States differ significantly from the political and economic systems used in those countries.

Economy and Cost of Living Take Center Stage

Economic issues are likely to remain central to the Arizona congressional race.

Voters across the district are weighing concerns that include:

• Inflation and household expenses
• Federal taxes and government spending
• Healthcare costs
• Social Security and Medicare
• Housing affordability
• Jobs and wages
• Immigration and border security

Feely has emphasized government spending and economic policy as key differences between himself and Shah.

Shah, meanwhile, has campaigned on his own record as a physician and former Arizona state lawmaker while presenting himself as a candidate focused on practical policy solutions.

Arizona’s 1st District Draws National Attention

The congressional seat is open after Republican Rep. David Schweikert chose not to seek another House term.

Shah previously ran for the district in 2024, while Feely entered the 2026 race after a career that included playing in the NFL and working as a television broadcaster.

Because competitive House districts can play an important role in determining which party controls Congress, Arizona’s 1st District is expected to attract significant attention ahead of the general election.

Will Feely and Shah Debate?

One question heading into the final stretch of the campaign is whether the two candidates will appear together in additional debates or public forums.

Feely has made Shah’s previous absences part of his campaign message, arguing that voters should have the opportunity to compare both candidates directly.

A future debate could give Arizona voters the chance to hear detailed answers on taxes, healthcare, inflation, immigration, federal spending, Social Security and Medicare.

For voters evaluating the race, the most useful questions may ultimately be straightforward: What does each candidate propose, how much would those policies cost, how would they be funded, and what impact could they have on Arizona households?