All kinds of chicanery gets wedged into heretofore good (or at least harmless) bills.
Case in point: SB1265, VOIP service; emergency telecommunication services.
It started its legislative existence as a bill that would have levied "the telecommunications services excise tax on VOIP service accounts for the purpose of funding emergency telecommunications services."
In other words, it would have levied a tax on internet telephone service that is already levied on regular and wireless phone services.
Not very harmful, that; one could even argue that the original sponsor, Sen. Linda Gray (R-LD10) came up with a reasonable and fair bill that addressed an inequity created by advancing technology.
On February 27, it passed the Senate's third read by a 17 - 13 margin; not an unusual margin, given the current partisan demographics in the senate (17 Republicans, 13 Democrats).
What was unusual was the fact that the 13 'no' votes were from Republicans.
That's a development that begs some questions -
Is Linda Gray one of those semi-mythical 'compassionate conservatives'? ...One of those long-rumored but thus far unseen 'moderate' Republicans?
Naaaahhhhh...she's a water-carrier, with her name attached to many of the anti-immigrant and anti-public education bills that percolate through the lege every session.
So what was going on? Why did she go against more than 3/4 of her caucus in the Senate? Was she turning over a new leaf and morphing into a responsible public servant?
Well, rest assured, the world is not turning upside-down; Linda Gray is still a hardcore immigrant-hater. She was just getting her 'sneaky' on.
Late last week, I caught a replay of the April 4 meeting of the House Appropriations Committee on AZ Capitol Television.
Note: the video of that meeting is still available on the lege's website.
She was there presenting her bill, which, due to an under-the-radar strike-everything amendment, was now a bill to require that civil courts charge fees to illegal immigrants for court services and costs related to their case, including interpreters.
Oh, and the courts would be required to notify ICE of a litigant's status if they were in the country illegally.
During the presentation of her soon-to-be-amended bill, she spoke about the "increased costs" to the courts to process the divorces (and other civil actions) of illegal immigrants.
When asked about the specific additional costs incurred by non-citizens by Phil Lopes (D-LD27), she didn't know them; she said that the bill addressing the problem was needed to determine the extent of the problem.
She did spend some time bemoaning the costs of interpreters in Maricopa County courts, however. No specific cost numbers, though.
She also responded vaguely when asked by Cloves Campbell Jr. (D-LD14) about the additional costs that would be incurred by the courts when they tried to collect fees from illegal immigrants, most of whom are poor and can't afford them in the first place.
Especially since, because of a provision in the bill, the courts will not be able to waive the fees for any reason (like inability to pay.)
Definitely not an open-arms reception from the Democrats on the committee.
On the other hand, she was given a warm, almost effusive, reception from committee chair Russell "National Alliance" Pearce.
Of course, he doesn't ever get truly 'effusive', though he does approach that state whenever he speaks about any legislation that harasses or attacks immigrants.
Anyway, the amended bill passed the committee by a party-line 9 - 6 vote. The only encouraging thing about the vote, if you can call it that, was that two of the Republican committee members initially 'passed' until it became evident that without their votes, it was going to be a close call.
I haven't found that it has gone any further as yet; the House leadership is probably waiting for a day when all of their members will be present before taking this bill to the floor for COW and Third Reading.
This is now a bill that deserves to be tracked closely; if it is passed by the House and Senate, people need to contact the Governor's office to urge a veto.
Good night!
No comments:
Post a Comment