ÃÛÌÒÓ°ÏñAV

What's being described as simply an effort to recognize history, , a resolution being sponsored by Rep. David Livingston,  lists all the reasons that the nearly 2,200 square mile area between what had been Israel's border before 1967 with neighboring Jordan and the Jordan River should be referred to by names that are listed in both the Old Testament and New Testament.

Israel gained control of the area during the Six-Day War, which pitted it against an Arab coalition primarily consisting of Syria, Jordan and Egypt.

The Peoria Republican said his purpose in sponsoring the measure is to have the legislature go on record as rejecting the term "West Bank'' as "a modern political construct.''

But the measure has raised questions about whether the real goal is to undermine claims of Palestinians who live in the area — and outnumber the Jewish settlers. Despite those questions, it has been approved by both the House and Senate as their formal position, although it has no force of law.

"The situation facing Palestinians today is not an abstract policy debate for many people in our state,'' said Martin Quezada, general counsel for the Arizona chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. "It is a humanitarian crisis that people around the world, including many Arizonans, view with deep moral concern.''

And Senate Minority Leader Priya Sundareshan said that, whatever the history of the name of the area, state lawmakers should not be getting involved. If nothing else, the Tucson Democrat said, it creates a bad precedent.

She said the claim inherent in Livingston's legislation is the fact that the names Judea and Samaria show up in the Bible and in various historic maps. But what also is true, said Sundareshan, is that what is now called "Arizona'' did not always bear that name.

Before statehood and before it became Arizona Territory, it showed up on maps as part of the New Mexico Territory.

"And long before that, we had the native inhabitants of this state, of this land, who had their own names for Arizona,'' she said.

"Do you really want to open that can of worms and start putting things into statute?'' Sundareshan asked colleagues during debate. "We'd be happy to talk about the indigenous names of the land we're currently standing on.''

All this, however, is not occurring in a vacuum.

The language for HCR 2047 comes almost verbatim from a draft by the .

Livingston is its state chair. And he said NACL sponsored a trip to Israel over Thanksgiving last year for himself and his wife.

"And we went to those cities,'' Livingston testified.

"And it was obvious, so obvious, that this is Israel, the people there, the culture there, the historic history there, that I was moved,'' he said. "And I thought it was that important that I run a bill like this.''

Livingston acknowledged this is part of a national movement, saying there are 20 states considering similar measures.

The measure drew support from Pinchas Allouche, the founding rabbi of Congregation Beth Tefillah in Scottsdale.

He said this isn't about asking Arizona lawmakers to solve matters of diplomacy or international relations. Instead, Allouche said, this is about speaking "the truth'' and that, for thousands of years, the area was known as Judea and Samaria.

"Even the most famous battle in the Bible, David versus Goliath, took place in Judea in the Valley of Elah,'' he said. "By contrast, the term 'West Bank' was introduced in the mid-20th century by the Kingdom of Jordan, which illegally occupied the territory in 1950,'' he said, attempting to erase Jewish history in the area by replacing the historic names.

But Civia Tamarkin, president of , said she sees a different motive.

"The only purpose it serves is to further the agenda of the National Association of Christian Lawmakers,'' she said. That organization has as its own mission statement to propose legislation and resolutions "to address major policy concerns from a Biblical world view.''

"It's an attempt to make a statement about a Christian nationalist agenda,'' said Tamarkin. "The only purpose is to infuse Biblical language into American liberties, into American way of life,'' she said, including American education.

And Rep. Kiana Sears said it is impossible to separate what supporters say is simply an academic exercise of renaming an area from the politics of the situation and the facts on the ground. The Mesa Democrat called the measure "appalling'' and said it comes "in the face of hatred, bigotry and just basically inhumane way of vilifying and victimizing the Islamic community.''

Because the measure is crafted as a resolution, it did not need gubernatorial approval. It became effective with the majority vote of the House and Senate.

This isn't the only measure this session dealing with Israel.

, deals with the perennial fight over the ability of homeowner and condominium associations to regulate what flags its residents can fly. Right now that legislatively-approved list includes the U.S. and state flags, flags of an Indian nation, flags honoring first responders, historic American flags, and flags remembering prisoners of war and those missing in action.

Sen. David Gowan proposed adding to that list any "flag from a nation that is allied with the United States.''

But by the time the Sierra Vista Republican was done with it, that had been narrowed — sharply. As it passed the Senate 20-8 and gained preliminary House approval, it now would allow only "a flag from a nation that is allied with the United States as a major non-NATO ally and that was established on May 1, 1948.''

And that includes only Israel.

Gowan told Capitol Media Services it was always his intent to have it be an Israel-only bill.

"I have a constituent who asked me to run this bill to allow them to fly the Israel flag in their HOA,'' he said. And he said he believed that the narrow focus would make it easier to get approval.

It did.

In fact, the only lawmaker who questioned the limited scope during the roll-call vote was Sen. Mitzi Epstein. The Tempe Democrat said she has a "huge problem'' with a law that lists which flags are and are not acceptable.

"It represents the Arizona legislature and HOAs censoring speech of homeowners,'' she said. "With Republican control, this list favors the priorities of the Republican majority party while quelling the speech and values of all other Arizonans.''

Epstein said the bill should have remained as originally crafted, allowing flags from all allied nations.

"But, for all of my Jewish constituents, I'm voting 'yes,' '' she said.

The measure still needs a final roll-call vote in the House before being ready to go to the governor.