The Arizona Senate gave preliminary approval to Medicaid/AHCCCS restoration today by approving an amendment to SB1492 that contained the restoration language.
It's not over yet, as it still must go through Third Read (final approval) in the Senate and then go over to the House for consideration, so bad things could still happen, but for today, thanks go out to...
...All 13 Senate Democrats, who are standing together in their duty of standing up for *all* Arizonans -
- Sen. Ed Ableser
- Sen. David Bradley
- Sen. Olivia Cajero Bedford
- Sen. Steve Farley
- Sen. Steve Gallardo
- Sen. Katie Hobbs
- Sen. Jack Jackson Jr.
- Sen. Leah Landrum Taylor
- Sen. Linda Lopez
- Sen. Barbara McGuire
- Sen. Robert Meza
- Sen. Lynne Pancrazi
- Sen. Anna Tovar
...and the five Republican state senators who joined them in standing up for the average Arizonan -
- Sen. Adam Driggs
- Sen. Rich Crandall
- Sen. Bob Worsley
- Sen. John McComish
- Sen. Steve Pierce
Things may change in the future (and I expect them to do so; they are Arizona Republicans, after all :) ), but for now, Sens. Driggs, Crandall, Worsley, McComish, and Pierce can be numbered among the "good guys".
A sixth Republican, Sen. Michele Reagan, also voted for the primary amendment, but she hedged her bets by also voting for nearly every one of the amendments to that amendment offered by Senate President Andy Biggs that were intended to weaken, to the point of ineffectualness, Medicaid restoration.
If, come tonight (the Senate is in session as I write this), she votes for Medicaid restoration, she'll earn my regard as "one of the good guys", on this issue, at least.
If, come tonight (did I mention that the Senate is in session as I write this?), she votes against it, in a shameless attempt to have it both ways for her (expected) statewide campaign next year (she can tell some crowds that she voted for Medicaid restoration, and other crowds that she voted against it), she'll earn my promise that next year, there won't be a day where her shamelessness is allowed to go unmentioned here.
No one, of any political persuasion, likes a flip-flopper, but many people can at least understand someone who changes their positions based on new facts.
However, there's no tolerance for someone who, with obvious calculation and utter brazenness, tries to appear to be on both sides of an issue.
Laurie Roberts of the Arizona Republic offers her take here.