 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
ARIZONA LEGISLATURE
2008 Session Pro-Borders Invasion Franchisers spend $33,780
on Dirty Ad Campaign against Pearce and His Employer Sanctions Law In all, the proponents of punishing Pearce and gut his employer sanctions law have directly spent $33,780. Here is their latest spending:
Pearce said: "Now that the curtain has been pulled back, it's clear that these fast food franchisers are only looking to line their pockets. I think it's disturbing that they are spending so much money to attack me." According to campaign finance reports, Magruder and Levecke's personal donations make up nearly half of the funds given to "Mesa Deserves Better," the controversial group targeting Pearce with misleading personal attacks. Affiliates of their "Stop Illegal Hiring" campaign donated the remaining funds, along with giving an additional $1,860 in donations to Kevin Gibbons. Their ill-fated "Mesa Deserves Better" personal attack campaign on Pearce and his family has been decried by hundreds of supporters, the East Valley Tribune, the Arizona Republic and even Governor Janet Napolitano. Pearce is being challenged for the Arizona State Senate by immigration attorney Kevin Gibbons, a pro-border invasion RINO who has outspent Pearce through donations from special interest groups. Democrats, and proponents of weakening the employer sanctions laws. "The ultimate goal of this group is to roll back immigration policies and weaken Arizona's Employer sanctions laws by any means necessary," said Pearce. "Their proposed law eliminates required use of E-Verify and its 99.7 percent accuracy rate in favor of the Federal I-9 process, which is prone to more fraud. They want to gut the law and make sure I am not around to do anything about it."
Lake Havasu Lawmakers Best Friends of Taxpayers in
2008; Farley Betrays Arizona Citizens PHOENIX -- Arizona’s FY 2008-2009 state budget, which is more than a billion dollars over budget, produced sharp divisions in legislators’ scores on the 24th annual “Friend of the Taxpayer” Legislative Scorecard, sponsored by the Arizona chapter of Americans for Prosperity (AFP), formerly the Arizona Federation of Taxpayers. Legislators voting against the budget bills scored an average of 82 percent, while legislators voting in favor scored an average of 10 percent.
The top award stayed in Lake Havasu City, with Rep. Trish Groe narrowly beating out Sen. Ron Gould, who earned the top spot the last three years in a row. Joining Groe and Gould in the category “Hero of the Taxpayer” were Gilbert Reps. Andy Biggs and Eddie Farnsworth, scoring 90 percent or higher.
To view the complete Scorecard, visit www.aztaxpayers.org. [M1]
With their combined high scores, Mohave County legislators Groe, Gould, and McLain made Legislative District 3 the highest-scoring district in the state. In second place was LD 22 (Gilbert), and in third place was LD 9 (Glendale/Peoria/Sun City). The average Republican legislator scored 70 percent (Friend of the Taxpayer), while the average Democratic legislator scored 9 percent (Hero of Big Government). Last year’s Party averages were 65 percent and 32 percent, respectively.
Widening the divide in scores were the failure of Leftist Governor Janet Napolitano and legislative majorities to prevent a possible $300 million increase in property taxes next year, advance school choice legislation, allow for private enterprise to provide for Arizona’s transportation infrastructure, or enact budget reforms that would help to rein in runaway spending.
For AFP-AZ, the brightest spot in the 2008 Legislative Session was the passage of transparency legislation that will allow Arizona taxpayers to go online and view all state expenditures made to all vendors. AFP-AZ hopes the 2009 Session will extend transparency to the county and city levels.
For the second year in a row, far Left liberal Rep. Steve Farley (D-Tucson) anchored the Scorecard, receiving a low 3 percent. Farley, who earned last year’s Empty Wallet Award, secured his ranking by casting the lone vote against the transparency legislation.
Americans for Prosperity-Arizona Dishes Kudos to District 18 Republicans
By Tom Jenney,
Arizona Director, Americans for Prosperity The Arizona chapter of Americans for Prosperity (AFP Arizona) has called the Legislative Session that ended June 27th the “worst in memory” for fiscal conservatives. Fortunately, LD18 delegation did a good job, from the point of view of fiscal conservatism, which aims to 1) restrain government spending, 2) prevent tax increases, 3) balance budgets without resorting to debt or accounting gimmicks, and 4) avoid using tax dollars for wasteful corporate-welfare boondoggles. Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano, aided by slim majorities in the Senate and House, failed Arizona taxpayers on all four counts. The final General Fund budget was officially $9.9 billion, but roughly one billion in spending commitments were pushed off the books, meaning that the real budget is closer to $11 billion. In any case, the actual available cash is projected to be $9.2 billion at most, meaning that even the official budget is $700 million in the hole. (And although the budget had very little in the way of real program cuts, the Governor and her allies did cut $5 million in funding for school choice vouchers for disabled and foster children. With an average amount of $4,000, the foster vouchers actually save the state money when children transfer out of traditional government school districts.) Coming after four years of irresponsibly large budgets, the budget passed in June will continue to push the state toward a constitutional crisis in which the Arizona Supreme Court may choose between Prop 108, the rule that mandates a two-thirds legislative majority for tax increases, and Props 301 and 204, which mandate large automatic spending increases for government schools and government-subsidized health care. With Prop 108 safely out of the way, the Big Spenders can raise taxes and increase per-capita government spending to the economy-strangling levels of California, Michigan, or New Jersey. Happily, NO member of your LD18 delegation voted for the budget (HB2209, et al): Sen. Karen Johnson (R)
kjohnson@azleg.gov (did not vote) Further, the Governor and her allies in the Legislature prevented the passage of measures that would permanently repeal the state equalization property tax rate. That failure leaves open the strong possibility that Arizona politicians will attempt to increase property taxes on homeowners and businesses by $250 million next year. LD18 Legislators who voted against allowing a $250 million property tax hike (HB2220) were: Sen. Karen Johnson (R)
kjohnson@azleg.gov Rep. Mark
Anderson (R)
manderson@azleg.gov (Reps. Anderson and Pearce also voted in favor of an important property tax levy limitation bill, HB2586. Unfortunately, the bill did not pass the House…) On the corporate-welfare boondoggle front, the Governor and Legislature approved a scheme to grant the special privileges of issuing tax-free bonds and levying taxes to the developer of a rock and roll theme park in Eloy. LD18 Legislators who voted in favor of the Eloy theme park scheme (SB1450) were: Rep. Mark Anderson (R) manderson@azleg.gov LD18 Legislators who voted against the Eloy theme park scheme (SB1450) were: Rep. Russell Pearce (R)
rpearce@azleg.gov On the bright side, one of the small victories for fiscal conservatives this year was blocking the creation of a new taxing district for baseball stadiums in Pima County. LD18 Legislators who voted against the Pima County baseball stadium tax (SB1084) were: Rep. Mark Anderson (R)
manderson@azleg.gov (Fortunately, the Senate did not get a chance to vote for the bill…) Heartbreaking Session for Students with Disabilities; Governor Throws Their Future into Chaos
By Dr. Matthew Ladner, Goldwater
Institute PHOENIX -- It's been a heartbreaking session for students with disabilities, because Arizona State Superintendent of Schools Tom Horne suspended two voucher programs that served them. Tim Keller of the Institute for Justice challenged the decision in court and wrote a piece calling on the Superintendent not to suspend the two voucher programs during their appeal.
This little tempest in a teapot might have been amusing, had farce not
turned to tragedy. Governor Napolitano's budget de-funded the voucher
programs for children with disabilities and foster care for the next
school year. Governor Napolitano signed these bills into law and then
prematurely ended their funding, throwing the lives of hundreds of
children into chaos. Governor, Arizona Legislature Unkind to Families
By Cathi Herrod, President, Center
for Arizona Policy PHOENIX -- Finally, after 166 days, I can report how families fared in the 2008 legislative session. Overall, the session was ugly with family-friendly policy usually taking a back seat. To put it mildly, the majority votes in the House and Senate simply aren't there to enact substantive pro-family policy then gain Governor Napolitano's signature. Thankfully, however, despite the political games, showdowns, and controversies, God was faithful throughout and some significant family-friendly gains were made. I want to express my appreciation to Ron Johnson, executive director of the Arizona Catholic Conference. Ron's a key ally as we work together at the Legislature to promote a sanctity of human life ethic, stand for marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and offer parents a choice on their children's education opportunities. Too often, newspapers and individuals only reference CAP as the family voice at the legislature. Our work wouldn't be nearly as possible or fruitful without Ron's leadership and partnership. Thanks, Ron!
Governor Defends Barbaric Action of Partial-Birth Abortion Yet again
By Cathi Herrod, President Yesterday, in
the midst of the marriage amendment debate, Governor Napolitano vetoed
the partial-birth abortion ban for the second time this session.
Partial-birth abortion is the gruesome procedure in which the baby's
entire body is delivered, except for the head, and then the baby is
killed by being stabbed in the neck with scissors and having its brain
vacuumed out. In this
second veto letter, the Governor falsely claimed the new ban would
introduce "more criminal penalties...into the relationship between a
woman and her physician." The state ban tracked identically the federal
criminal penalties. A state ban on partial-birth is needed because the
federal law only applies in limited scenarios with limited enforcement
options.
Arizona Marriage Referendum Passes in Senate, Goes to November Ballot
By Cathi Herrod, President, Center for Arizona
Policy
The House passed the
referendum several weeks ago. The referendum will be placed on the
November ballot for the citizens to determine if the state marriage law
will also be enshrined in the Arizona Constitution. Statement by State Rep. Russell Pearce (Republican, Mesa) on the 2009 State Budget Agreement June 27, 2008 The '09 budget has been passed by the Democrats and a few Republicans who got their 30 pieces of silver as they partnered with the governor and Dems to pass one of the worst budgets in history and perhaps forced this state into mandatory tax increases to pay for their reckless spending. They ignored the taxpayer as they threw their fellow Republicans under the bus because they got their payoff in the budget: (in the Senate, four Republicans joined the Democrats, and in the House it was also four Republicans joining the Democrats). As they passed this horrific budget with over $2 billion in borrowing, photo radar for revenue purposes, increasing the lottery games and advertising and breaking promises to the taxpayer. In addition, there will be a $300-million tax increase as the governor refused to make the property tax reduction permanent. As a result, there will be a property tax increase at a time that we have record foreclosures and families struggling to keep their homes. Call it the Arizona governor's “fleece the taxpayer act of 2009" -- or the Arizona “bankruptcy act of 2009." I have never seen such reckless and total disregard for the taxpayers of this state as seen in the Senate budget. The Senate would have you destroy this state with excessive debt, failure to cut reckless spending projects and programs, broken promises (written into statue) to require school districts to provide all capital if they decide to have all-day K ($300 to $400 million in capital cost) as agreed upon (more broken promises), in Prop 301 it promised to phase out excess utilities in that huge tax increase, and they undid that promise at a cost of about $100 million to the taxpayer). They agreed to balance the budget with photo radar across this state on all freeways and state highways, they used up all the rainy day fund and used fund sweeps. They make the budget deficit hole for 2010 worse and possibly unfixable without huge additional debt and/or tax increases. No more rainy day fund, no more funds to sweep, no more easy solutions. They have all been used up. This does not leave any good options. Oh, by the way, most of those pushing this bad budget have bus tickets out of town when the train is scheduled to wreck. Senate Considering Corporate Welfare for Proposed Eloy Theme Park
By Tom Jenney PHOENIX -- The Arizona Senate is considering SB1450, a bill that would award a private company the privilege of issuing $750 million in tax-free bonds, so that it can build a rock music theme park in Eloy. Proponents of SB1450 have contacted me, arguing that the bill’s language removes any legal obligation for taxpayers to bail out the theme park district in the event that it cannot attract enough visitors to pay back the bond creditors. That appears to be true about the legal obligation, but the legislation does not remove the political obligation to bail out the theme park district. If the Eloy theme park turns out to be a flop, future legislatures will be under intense pressure to bail out the theme park. If they do not, the failure of the district to pay back creditors will hurt Arizona’s bond ratings, effectively raising the interest rates for revenue bonds for traditional public-private partnerships, such as road construction projects. Again, the economic downsides of the Decades Theme Park deal are not nearly as important as the question of principle at stake: Should the government give special taxing privileges to chosen companies? Again, the answer to that question is, “NO.” The government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers in the economy. Further, if we let the Eloy deal pass, it will only encourage the rest of the sharks, who are already pestering the legislature to pass the Big Boondoggle Bill of 2008, which includes special tax breaks for entertainment districts, ballparks and other politically-favored industries, all in the name of “economic stimulus.” Remember that every dollar given to a favored industry in a tax credit is a dollar that cannot be cut from the taxes of ordinary individuals, families, and businesses. Somehow, that does not seem very stimulating… For emerging details on the "Big Boondoggle Bill of 2008," see Mary Jo Pitzl’s story in today’s Republic The tax credit handouts in the "Big Boondoggle Bill of 2008" make the Eloy deal look almost innocent. It seems that our politicians just can’t break the habit of picking winners and losers in the Arizona economy—no matter how many losers they pick. We will keep you posted on developments related to the "Big Boondoggle Bill." Meanwhile, if you haven’t already, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR STATE SENATOR, AND ENCOURAGE HIM OR HER TO OPPOSE SB1450. WE ARE ESPECIALLY CONCERNED ABOUT ANY SENATOR WHO VOTED YES (“Y”) ON THE earlier version of the bill. Marriage Referendum Waiting in the Wings By Cathi Herrod, President PHOENIX -- Nearly all non-budget action at the state Capitol has ground to a halt as the legislators try to hammer out an agreement to solve the over $2-billion deficit. Here are the CAP-supported bills that are still pending:
Arizona Marriage Referendum Breathes New Life on Thursday
By United Families Arizona PHOENIX -- As you recall, the Arizona Marriage Referendum was dealt a disappointing setback last week in the state House of Representatives. However, members of the Arizona Legislature are breathing new life back into the attempt to place a marriage protection proposition on the November ballot. Sen. Ron Gould has introduced Senate Concurrent Resolution 1042 as a strike everything marriage amendment. It will be deliberated Thursday, April 10 in the House Judiciary Committee hearing. The meeting begins at 9 a.m. in House Hearing Room 4. TAKE ACTION!1. Call and/or email the following members of the House Judiciary Committee and ask them to support the Arizona Marriage Referendum:
2. Please consider attending the House Judiciary Committee hearing and support the Arizona Marriage Referendum: 1700 W. Washington, Phoenix If approved by the Arizona Legislature, the Arizona Marriage Referendum will be placed on the November election ballot. The referendum proposes to amend the state constitution to recognize marriage as the union between one man and one woman. If passed, judicial activists will not be able to declare state marriage law unconstitutional. The definition of marriage will be protected, and the rights of children to have both a mother and a father will be guaranteed. Taxpayers Spared of Massive Property Tax By Tom Jenney PHOENIX -- A lone Democratic state senator saved an important property tax bill today. Sen. Ken Cheuvront (District 15, Central Phoenix) joined 15 Republican senators in voting for House Bill 2220, which would prevent a $250 million property tax from being reinstated next year. Two Republican senators—Sen. Carolyn Allen (District 8, Scottsdale and Fountain Hills) and Sen. Tom O’Halleran (District 1, Prescott and Yavapai County)—refused to vote to protect property taxpayers. Marriage Referendum Fails in State House; Governor Rewards Planned Parenthood Base with Controversial VetoesBy United Families Arizona PHOENIX -- The Arizona Marriage Referendum failed in Thursday afternoon’s debate in the Arizona House of Representatives, not because it did not have the votes. But, because an anti-family amendment was attached that kept it from moving to the Senate. HCR 2065 aimed to amend the state constitution to recognize the marriage union as one man and one woman. The measure, if fully resurrected, will be on the November ballot and will change the constitution to be consistent with state law. Rep. Kirsten Sinema successfully added a domestic partner benefits amendment to the bill. One of many of the bill's co-sponsors, Speaker Jim Weiers, sat by and watched as his bill was hijacked during floor action when the poorly-written domestic partner benefits amendment was added. The motion to strip the amendment from the bill failed 28-27 due to House leadership’s inability to round up the votes. Rep. Lucy Mason and Rep. Jack Brown, lawmakers who had promised to vote for the bill, were absent for the important vote to remove the harmful amendment. Mason retired to her office to work on an energy bill. Rep. Michele Reagan and Rep. Marion McClure had also promised to vote for the bill. Instead they both voted for the Sinema amendment. Backers of the bill are now working on a procedural option to restore the original referendum. . Your Calls are Needed For now, you can help by calling Speaker Jim Weiers, Representatives Lucy Mason, Michele Reagan, Marian McClure and Jack Brown. Ask them to do all they can to ensure the passage of the marriage referendum. No more games. The people deserve to have the referendum on the ballot in November.
Governor Napolitano Vetoes Pro-Life Bills On Friday, Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano honored her Planned Parenthood base by vetoing a bill banning partial-birth abortion. Congress previously passed such a ban, which was upheld by the United States Constitution. According to her veto message, Napolitano opposed the bill partially due to the harshness of the criminal penalties that would have been imposed on those breaking the new law. Some 2,035 people contacted the governor in support of the bill, compared to just 172 opposing. Beholden to her pro-choice base, the governor is obviously out of step with the mainstream views of Arizona. The governor also vetoed a bill amended the state’s parental consent law. House Bill 2263 would have closed loopholes allowing minors to sidestep requirements for obtaining abortions without parental consent. Call the governor today and tell her of your disapproval of her veto. Ask her to sign the next bill that makes it to her desk. Phone: (602) 542-1318 or toll free 1-800-253-0883. GOP Leadership 'Goes Wobbly,' Divorces its Support of Doomed Arizona Marriage Amendment By Dennis Durband, Editor PHOENIX -- The people in Lucy Mason's legislative district worked hard to get her elected and they worked hard in support of the Arizona Marriage Referendum. Despite their efforts, they didn't get true representation today as Mason sat in her office working on her transportation bill and refused to vote for the referendum, which lost 28-27 in the Arizona House of Representatives. Five courage-challenged members punted on the vote -- not exactly what they were elected to do. Fearing the repercussions of supporting Arizona children's right to a mother and a father, Iraq war hero Jonathan Paton called in sick and sat out the vote. Democrats also let down the children of the state, who do far better in the homes of married man and woman. Jack Brown's folks back home didn't elect him so he could go AWOL on the referendum. Neither did David Lujan' or Martha Garcia's. House Speaker Jim Weiers, Rep. Jennifer Burns, Paton and Senate President Tim Bee all pulled a George Herbert Walker Bush: they went wobbly on the marriage referendum. Burns feared a Democratic take-over of the legislature if Republicans voted to enshrine the one-man/one-woman union as marriage into the state's constitution. House leadership crumbled behind Weiers and Bob McComish. For the past few days, Weiers had promised a vote, but kept delaying on it. Though the speaker had his name attached to HCR 2065 as a co-sponsor, he and Bee went wobbly on the referendum at the start of the legislative session in January and never found their footing. Mason had also co-sponsored the bill. Truth is that all of the above are now in trouble in their home districts because marriage is the bedrock of stable societies. A majority of Republicans and Democrats support marriage. This marriage referendum, had it passed in the November election, would have squared state marriage law with the constitution. State constitutional marriage amendments have passed in liberal states. But in Arizona, the tepid legislative leadership is fearful of passing social issues foundational to the core of the Republican Party. RINOs Michele Reagan, Pete Hershberger and Marian McClure, as usual, joined with Democrats to oppose an important social issue bill. It's 215 days to the election. Conservatives won't easily forget this day. YES VOTES (27): Mark Angerson, Andy Biggs, Sam Crump, John Kavanaugh, Nancy McLain, Rick Murphy, Bob Robson, Bob Stump, Steve Yarbrough, Kirk Adams, Ray Barnes, Tom Boone, Judy Burges, Doug Clark, Eddie Farnsworth, Trish Groe, Bill Konopnicki, John McComish, John Nelson, Nancy Barto, Rich Crandall, Adam Driggs, Warde Nichols, Russell Pearce, Andrew Tobin, Jerry Weiers, Jim Weiers NO VOTES (28): Ed Ableser, Olivia Bedford, Tom Chabin, Steve Farley, Linda Lopez, Marian McClure, Lynn Pancrazi, Tom Prezelski, Albert Tom, Chad Campbell, Mark DeSimone, Robert Meza, Michele Reagan, David Schapira, Jackie Thrasher, Theresa Ulmer, Nancy Wright, Manny Alvarez, David Bradley, Jennifer Burns, Cloves Campbell, Steve Gallardo, Pete Hershberger, Phil Lopes, Barbie McGuire, Ben Miranda, Pete Rios, Kyrsten Sinema NOT VOTING: Jonathan Paton, Jack Brown, Martha Garcia, David Lujan, Lucy Mason Profiles in Legislative Courage: Johnson & Pearce By Tom
Jenney, Arizona Federation of Tax[auers State Sen. Karen Johnson and Rep. Russell Pearce took a courageous stand this week by voting against a bill that would force insurance companies to cover the diagnosis and treatment of Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASDs). The passage of the ASD mandate is a textbook example of the phenomenon known in public choice economics as Concentrated Benefits and Diffused Costs (CBDC). Persons who stand to get a lot of money from a piece of legislation have a strong incentive to expend resources (mainly time and money) to lobby in favor of that legislation. Opposition to a piece of legislation tends to be very weak if the costs of the legislation are spread out thinly among taxpayers or consumers. The ASD mandate will force insurance companies to pay up to $50,000 annually for behavioral therapy for children nine and younger, and $25,000 annually for older children. For families with children suffering from ASDs, that is a huge benefit. It is obvious why they would lobby vigorously for passage of the bill, and even participate in a candlelight vigil outside the Legislature. At the same time, the costs of the ASD mandate (which may be around $50 annually per insured*) will be widely diffused. Insurance companies will pass on much of the costs to employers who buy insurance policies, and employers will pass on much of those costs to workers. Some workers will pay by losing out on wage increases, while others will pay by being unemployed. But even if workers had known that the ASD mandate was moving through the Legislature, and that it would cost them real money, they would not have gone down to the Legislature to lobby in an effort to save themselves $50 a year. Such is the insidious nature of CBDC. Of course, everything counts in large amounts. The cumulative burden of existing mandates already cause insurance premiums in Arizona to cost hundreds of dollars a year more than they would otherwise, resulting in greater numbers of uninsured workers. The victory of the ASD activists will encourage the victims of other diseases to lobby for new insurance mandates, and so the rising costs of mandates will continue to add to the ranks of the uninsured. Insurance mandates are welfare: the forced transfer of resources from one set of persons to another. As such, the Legislature should have had an honest debate about whether ASD victims should get welfare or rely on private charities. If the Legislature had voted for welfare, those benefits should have been distributed through the Department of Economic Security, or through AHCCCS. Instead, by hiding a welfare transfer in the insurance code, the Legislature has chosen to disrupt the efficient operation of the insurance market, which performs the vitally important social function of risk allocation. Autism is a terrible disease, and the teary testimonies in favor of the mandate were sincere and heartfelt. Indeed, they were so moving that some otherwise reliable fiscal conservatives ended up voting in favor of the bill, even though they normally oppose welfare and heavy-handed interference in private markets. Johnson was one of only six Senate stalwarts who managed to resist the emotional blackmail by the ASD activists. Explaining his vote against the bill in the Senate Appropriations Committee, Sen. Jack Harper (R-Surprise) stated, “I have never voted for an insurance mandate since I have been in this body. My first year in this body it was part of our majority agenda that we would not support insurance mandates because insurance costs were so sky high now because we have 20-plus insurance mandates. This particular one coming up makes me feel like a monster, but I still have to vote ‘no.’” Harper is not a monster. Neither are the other 25 members of the Legislature who had the courage to vote No on this bill. If anything is monstrous, it is a government spoils system in which Legislators rob Peter to pay Paul, vote to drive up the cost of insurance for working Arizonans, and allow themselves to believe that they’re not really handing out welfare. State Treasurer: General Fund in the Red in Five Weeks, Prompt Response Needed March 19, 2008 PHOENIX – Arizona State Treasurer Dean Martin today urged the Arizona Legislature and Governor Janet Napolitano to quickly reach an agreement to balance the FY 2008 budget. “The General Fund of the State of Arizona will be running RED INK in as little as five weeks if a revised budget is not passed,” Martin said. “The government has simply been spending much faster than revenues are coming in. As State Treasurer, I essentially manage the state’s bank. We currently have over $12.7 billion dollars in deposits invested, of which $5.2 billion are state funds. We predicted this recession last year and have been preparing our investment portfolio, including the rainy day fund accordingly.” Martin said his office has structured investments to ensure there is liquidity for both state and local governments to meet their cash needs during this economic downturn. As a bank, the state is in very good shape, he said, but the governor and legislature need to make sure the General Fund account is not overdrawn in the next few weeks. “We have analyzed the current spending for the first 262 days of this fiscal year (as of March 18th), and the state has not slowed its rate of spending during this budget crisis," Martin said. "The exact opposite has occurred; general fund spending is on a pace to even exceed the original FY 08 appropriation. At the current spending rate, the General Fund only has enough revenue to make one more payment to schools, and perhaps three more paydays for employees before the account is overdrawn at the bank.” The state has already spent over $7.6 billion of the General Fund; more than $29 million per day. Meanwhile revenues have continued to slide. The governor and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) have lowered their General Fund revenue estimates. Without immediate intervention by the governor and legislature to pass a revised FY2008 budget, the General Fund will be overdrawn as soon as April 23 but no later than May 5. “While the state does have other funds in other accounts, as treasurer I do not have statutory authority to move money from the state’s other accounts to cover their deficit; only the legislature and the governor can move those funds through an appropriation. They need to act quickly before the General Fund account is overdrawn.” In typical fashion, the governor reacted angrily to Martin's message. Napolitano was testy and defensive over the fact that under her administration, the state has faced huge annual budget deficits more often than it has kept spending within reach of the constitutional mandate to balance the state budget. Napolitano has typically resorted to rollovers and other ethically-challenged sleight of hand to play budget games. Fiscally Responsible State Reps Protect Taxpayers from Property Tax Hike By Tom Jenney, Executive
Director, Arizona Federation of Taxpayers PHOENIX -- This week, 32 of the 60 Arizona state representatives voted to prevent a $250 million state property tax from coming back next year. The Reps The names of the other 28 Arizona representatives who voted to put off the permanent repeal of the tax until next year, when budget rules will make the bill even more difficult to pass. It was a close vote in the House, but it may be even closer in the Senate. Several senators are on the fence. The ugly fact is that many of them are listening to the lobbyists from the spending interests. The spending interests cannot seem to get enough of your money—even during an economic recession, even with foreclosures climbing, and even after last year’s record increases in property tax collections.
Anti-Corporate-Welfare Bill Passes Senate
Committee
Feb. 25, 2008 PHOENIX -- The anti-boondoggle bill, SCR 1028, was approved by the Arizona Senate's Financial Institutions, Insurance, and Retirement Committee. If passed by the legislature during the current session, SCR 1028 would allow voters in November to strengthen constitutional provisions prohibiting public funds (taxpayer money) from being given as gifts or loans to private businesses. Arizona Marriage Referendum Advances SCR 1038 (Arizona Marriage Referendum) passed the Senate Public Safety and Human Services Committee by a 4-1 vote Feb. 21. Anti-Corporate-Welfare Bill in Senate Financial Institutions Committee Feb. 25, 2008 PHOENIX -- Today, an important anti-boondoggle bill, SCR 1028, is on the agenda of the Senate Financial Institutions, Insurance, and Retirement Committee, which is scheduled to meet at 1:30 p.m. in Senate Hearing Room 2. If passed by the Legislature during the current session, SCR 1028 would allow voters in November to prohibit public funds (taxpayer money) from being given as gifts or loans to private businesses. The Arizona Constitution’s existing anti-boondoggle provisions should be very clear, but in recent decades, the Arizona Supreme Court has allowed large loopholes for gifts and loans that are supposedly for “public” purposes. Among the gifts to private businesses that have been justified by the Court’s loose interpretation are subsidies for sporting-goods stores (such as the Cabela’s in Glendale), automobile dealerships (such as Scottsdale’s Motor Mile), shopping centers (Riverview in Mesa, City North in Phoenix, Prasada in Surprise, to name a very few), and sports facilities from Tempe to Tucson. Employer Sanctions Law Working (Before Taking Affect), but Who's Trying to Gut the Legislation?
By Dennis Durband
Feb. 16, 2008
PHOENIX -- "If it's working, fix it."
That's the aim of State Representative Bill Konopnicki (R-Safford),
the Jubilation T. Cornpone of the Arizona Legislature. He's a maverick
who is moving legislation through the House to remove the teeth from
and gut the 2007 Employer Sanctions Law. And this in an election
year? Guest workers are leaving Arizona in droves. And Konopnicki isn't
satisfied?
So far, Konopnicki has been in the race
for Rick Renzi's soon-to-be-departed Congressional District 1 seat,
then out of the race and now possibly back in.
At a time when Employer Sanctions are
working (without one employer having yet been taken to the woodshed),
this Republican politico is working to "fix" something that is working
before it has even taken affect. This should not surprise. After all,
Konopnicki is perhaps the best Republican friend leftist Rep. Kyrsten
Sinema ever had. The dynamic duo once co-sponsored a bill calling for
the creation of an "Arizona Department of Peace." They'd love to teach
the world to sing.
Arizona Seeks to Defend Marriage from Activists, Rogue Judges Feb. 15, 2008 Pro-family advocates in Arizona are hoping that the second time's a charm when it comes to banning same-sex "marriage." Just two years after the marriage protection amendment was narrowly defeated in the Grand Canyon State, GOP lawmakers in the state House and Senate introduced new bills yesterday, HCR 2065 and SCR 1038, which would give opponents of the 2006 measure an opportunity to reconsider their views. Unlike the last proposal, this amendment plainly states, "Only a union between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as marriage in this state." After Arizona became the first state to reject a ban on same-sex "marriage," leaders learned from the experience and simplified the proposal's language.
Two years ago, homosexual activists used the broad wording to convince residents that a marriage amendment would jeopardize the domestic partnerships of heterosexual couples. That tactic is unlikely to work for liberals this time around since the measure now mimics what already exists in state law. If values voters prevail, Arizonans can rest assured that as a part of the state constitution, traditional marriage can withstand even the fiercest legal attacks. Spending limit bill passes House Appropriations Committee Feb. 14, 2008 PHOENIX—The Arizona Federation of Taxpayers, a state chapter of Americans for Prosperity, today lauded the majority on the House Appropriations Committee for voting in favor of HCR 2038, a referendum bill that would allow Arizona voters in November to reduce the state’s existing constitutional spending limit from 7.41 percent of state personal income to 6.4 percent. (Vote detail below.) “The Arizona budget has been a dangerous rollercoaster ride,” said AFT-AFP state director Tom Jenney, referring to the huge spending increases enacted by the Governor and legislative majorities in recent years—and to the large spending cuts required to balance the FY 2008 and 2009 budgets. “HCR 2038’s spending limit would slow down that rollercoaster,” Jenney said. Jenney testified this afternoon before Committee members, refuting several claims put forth by the Children’s Action Alliance in a “fact sheet” on HCR 2038. Contrary to the Alliance’s claim that “the proposed limit would force cuts in education, health care and public safety,” Jenney pointed out that the bill allows agency budgets to grow at the same rate as the state economy, which in most years is significantly faster than the rate of growth of population plus inflation. “HCR 2038 is a fiscally moderate proposal,” Jenney said. “If a Legislator believes that government should get larger as a portion of the economy, he or she is a Big Spender, not a fiscal moderate.” According to figures from Arizona’s Economic Estimates Commission, every budget from FY1998 to FY2005 would have qualified at the 6.4 percent level. Also, HCR 2038 would allow the Legislature to lift the cap in emergency situations with a two-thirds vote. AFT-AFP encouraged taxpayers to send notes of thanks to the committee members who voted in favor of the bill: Rep. Kirk Adams (R-Mesa), kadams@azleg.gov Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Gilbert), abiggs@azleg.gov Rep. Judy Burges (R-Surprise, Sun City West/Grand), jburges@azleg.gov Rep. Doug Clark (R-Anthem, North Phoenix), dclark@azleg.gov Rep. Trish Groe (R-Lake Havasu City), tgroe@azleg.gov Rep. John Kavanagh (R-Scottsdale, Fountain Hills), jkavanagh@azleg.gov Rep. Nancy McLain (R-Bullhead City, Mohave County), nmclain@azleg.gov Rep. Rick Murphy (R-Glendale, Peoria, Sun City), rmurphy@azleg.gov Rep. Russell Pearce (R-Mesa), rpearce@azleg.gov Rep. Jerry Weiers (R-Litchfield Park, Goodyear), jpweiers@azleg.gov The committee members who voted against the bill were: Rep. Olivia Cajero Bedford (D-West Tucson), ocajerobedford@azleg.gov Rep. Cloves Campbell (D-South Phoenix), clcampbell@azleg.gov Rep. Linda Lopez, (D-South Tucson), llopez@azleg.gov Rep. David Lujan (D-Central Phoenix), dlujan@azleg.gov Rep. Pete Rios (D-Pinal County), prios@azleg.gov Rep. David Schapira (D-Tempe), dschapira@azleg.gov State Ban on Partial-Birth Infanticide Moves to Hearing Monday
Center for Arizona Policy Social issues alert: State Ban on Partial-Birth Abortion. Patterned after the federal law upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, SB 1099/HB 2769 places a ban on partial-birth abortion in Arizona statute. SB 1099 will be addressed in the Senate Judiciary Committee Monday, February 11 at 1:30 p.m. The hearing is open to the public and available for viewing online (click on "Live Proceedings").Parental Consent for Abortion. This legislation will codify guidelines from an appellate court's opinion for judges considering granting permission for a minor to have an abortion without parental consent. The bill passed in the House Health Committee and the Senate Public Safety and Human Services Committee this week. In opposing these bills, Planned Parenthood continues to allege that the legislation would add additional burdens to a minor seeking an abortion. That simply isn't accurate. This opinion doesn't add any new burdens. Rather, it simply puts into state law for all to see the guidelines a court already has ordered be followed. These bills may see further action in their respective houses next week. School Choice. HB 1098 to extend the corporate tax credit program for tuition scholarships has passed the House Ways and Means Committee and awaits further action. HB 2100 to facilitate individual scholarship tax credit donations through payroll deductions also has passed House Ways and Means and awaits further action. Students' Religious Liberties Act. HB 2713 enumerates the constitutional rights that students in public schools have to express religious viewpoints in class, in academic work, and through clothing or jewelry. This legislation is needed desperately to avoid the many situations arising in schools over whether students can make announcements about a prayer service, have yearbook pages acknowledging God, etc. Tough road ahead for ban on taxpayer-funded lobbying By Tom Jenney, Executive
Director In an effort to end the use of taxpayer funds for lobbying, Arizona Senator Linda Gray (R-Northwest Phoenix) introduced SCR 1009, a referendum bill also known as No Taxpayer Money for Lobbyists (NTML). If passed during the current legislative session, NTML would allow Arizona voters in November to prohibit the use of public funds for lobbying, while safeguarding the ability of elected officials, public agencies, departments, boards, commissions, and political subdivisions to provide expert testimony and information to members of the Legislature. Although it started off the session with more than a dozen sponsors, and earned the endorsement of the state GOP at its mandatory meeting on January 26th, NTML was held in the Senate’s Government Committee this week. The difficulties faced by the bill in that committee show just how tough it will be to get the reform through the Legislature. One of the committee members, Sen. Meg Burton Cahill (D-Tempe), expressed the view that the democratic election of local government officials confers legitimacy on all of their decisions, including the decision to give public funds to lobbyists. That is a common view down at the Legislature, although it was not the view of the framers of the US and Arizona Constitutions, who believed that government should have limited powers. Sen. Robert Blendu (R-Litchfield Park, Goodyear) expressed worries that a ban on taxpayer-funded lobbying would disrupt the information-providing function of the lobbying system. While he is correct that lobbying does facilitate the flow of information about policies, it does not follow that lobbyists should have access to public funds. Instead, elected officials and government employees should raise lobbying money the way other interest groups do—by means of private, voluntary contributions. Sen. Jake Flake (R-Gila and Apache Counties) argued that there is no inherent big-government bias to taxpayer-funded lobbying. He is correct that we should not make blanket statements about the aims of all taxpayer-funded lobbying, but examples of big-government bias come readily to mind. In recent years, lobbyists in Arizona have used public funds to oppose popular efforts to end eminent domain abuse, reduce income and property taxes, and extend educational opportunities to children through school choice. Sen. Flake also expressed some understandable concerns about geographical equity: the mayor of Snowflake will have more difficulty getting to legislative hearings than the mayor of Glendale. However, there is nothing in NTML that would prevent the Legislature from reimbursing city and county officials for travel expenses when they are invited to Phoenix to testify before legislative committees. Facing opposition from the Committee’s majority—Senators Blendu, Burton Cahill, Flake, and the nearly silent Jorge Luis Garcia (D-Tucson)—Senator Gray held the bill. From here, NTML faces a tough road. Perhaps an amended version of the bill can get out of committee and go to a vote before the full Senate. Or perhaps a House version of the bill can move forward. If the Legislature fails us, taxpayer activists will have to wait until next year to collect signatures and put a citizen initiative on the 2010 ballot. No Taxpayer Money for Lobbyists goes to Senate Government Committee By Tom Jenney, Executive
Director This Monday, February 4th, the No Taxpayer Money for Lobbyists bill, SCR 1009, is the top item on the agenda of the Senate Government Committee, which is scheduled to meet at 1:30 p.m. in Senate Hearing Room 3. If passed by the Legislature during the current session, SCR 1009 would allow voters in November to prohibit the use of public funds (taxpayer money) for lobbying, while safeguarding the ability of public agencies, departments, boards, commissions, and political subdivisions to provide expert testimony and information to members of the Legislature. If you can make it down to the Legislature, the hearing should be quite a spectacle. There will likely be dozens, if not hundreds, of lobbyists there, most of them using your tax dollars to argue against losing access to your tax dollars—which they use to ask the Legislature for even more tax dollars! If you cannot make it on Monday, please send a quick email to the Committee members to encourage them to allow SCR 1009 to move forward. We want to see a floor vote on the bill, so we can find out where our state Senators stand. Senate Government Committee members: Sen. Robert Blendu (R-12), rblendu@azleg.gov Sen. Meg Burton Cahill (D-17), mburtoncahill@azleg.gov Sen. Jake Flake (R-5), jflake@azleg.gov Sen. Jorge Luis Garcia (D-27), jgarcia@azleg.gov Sen. Linda Gray (R-10), lgray@azleg.gov (Thanks to Sen. Gray—this is her bill!) Sen. Jack W. Harper (R-4), jharper@azleg.gov (He is the Committee Chairman) Sen. Charlene Pesquiera (D-26), cpesquiera@azleg.gov At the Arizona Republican Party’s mandatory meeting on Saturday, state committeemen voted overwhelmingly to support SCR 1009. resolution language in support of SCR 1009 State GOP supports lower state spending limit, ban on taxpayer-funded lobbying Jan. 29, 2008 PHOENIX—At the Arizona Republican Party’s mandatory meeting today, state committeemen voted overwhelmingly to support legislative referendum bills that would allow voters in November to institute a ban on taxpayer-funded lobbying and lower the state’s constitutional spending limit. Both bills are championed by the Arizona Federation of Taxpayers, a state chapter of Americans for Prosperity. “One party down, two to go,” said AFT-AFP state director Tom Jenney. “The passage of these resolutions greatly strengthens the state GOP’s claim that it is a party of fiscal conservatism and fiscal responsibility,” he said. “We hope to achieve similar support from Arizona’s other political parties.” If passed by a majority of legislators during the current legislative session, HCR 2038 would give voters in November an opportunity to amend Arizona’s constitutional spending limit to cap spending by the state government at no more than 6.4 percent of state personal income. (The current constitutional limit is 7.41 percent.) Text of the spending limit resolution If passed by a majority of legislators during the current session, SCR 1009, also known as No Taxpayer Money for Lobbyists, would allow Arizona voters in November to prohibit the use of public funds for lobbying, while safeguarding the ability of public agencies, departments, boards, commissions, and political subdivisions to provide expert testimony and information to members of the Legislature. Text of the ban on taxpayer-funded lobbying Slowing Down Arizona’s Budget Rollercoaster Pearce introduces Spending Limit Referendum Bill, HCR 2038
By Thomas Jenney The governor and her big spender allies in the Legislature have spent the state government into another deficit crisis. Now, some of the Big Spenders are using the deficit as an excuse to justify increased property taxes next year. Arizona’s budget problems really got out of control in FY 2006 and FY 2007, when the size of state government as a portion of the state economy exceeded 6.5 percent—levels of spending not seen since the early 1990s. Spending as a portion of the economy is down a little this year, but the Governor and the Big Spenders will soon push it even higher. Today, Rep. Russell Pearce (Republican, District 18, Mesa) introduced HCR 2038, a referendum bill that would give voters in November an opportunity to freeze the size of state government at 6.4 percent of state personal income. That would keep state government from taking a larger and larger piece of the state economy. The 6.4-percent bill is a fiscally moderate proposal: It allows state government to grow, but only as fast as the state economy. If a Legislator believes that government should get larger as a portion of the economy, he or she is a Big Spender, not a fiscal moderate. SCR 1009 was introduced yesterday, thanks to state legislators from your district. Also known as No Taxpayer Money for Lobbyists, the bill would give voters in November the opportunity to prohibit governments and government agencies from using taxpayer money to lobby the Legislature. SCR 1009 would allow governments and government agencies to continue providing information to legislative committees, but they would not be allowed to spend our money to hire lobbyists. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||