Impressions from today's Senate Appropriations meeting

Yeah, I know I was there for only one bill (and it is still going strong as I type this), but they delivered a *lot* of subject material...

...A number of Democratic Representatives were in attendance at the Senate hearing, at least until they had to leave to attend a House floor session. Reps. Schapira, Heinz, Patterson, and Cloves Campbell Jr. observed at least of the goings-on, probably in preparation for the coming fights.

...Russell Pearce was the one designated to jump in front of the bullet today, generally being the one and only Republican to give voice to his party's objections to Democratic amendments. Generally his comments followed the form " 'I love' children, developmentally disabled people, corrections officers, etc. (or whoever the Democratic amendments tried to support)" before throwing that group under the bus.

...Jack Harper is very likely an idiot. To most regular readers of this blog, that I have a low opinion of his intelligence won't come as a surprise, he was in rare form today. Early in the meeting, Democratic Senators proposed an amendment to try to put the cuts in the Democratic-held Attorney General's office (deep) on par with those cuts in the other, Republican-held, statewide offices (virtually nonexistent). There were a couple of sarcastic comments from Democratic senators, including one by Rebecca Rios, that they were *certain* that there was no partisan vindictiveness at work. (This elicited at least one stifled guffaw from a certain LD17 blogger :)) )

Later in the meeting, a spokeswoman for the AZ Corporation Commission expressed reservations about the nature of some of the cuts to the ACC.

Harper jumped on this. He noted that only two of the five members of the ACC are Democrats and that this is proof that the Republicans made their budget cuts without regard to partisan affiliation.

What he didn't note is that the ACC is a distinct branch of government with its own powers, powers that many in the lege would like to accrue to themselves. In addition, while Republicans hold a majority of seats on the Commission, one of them is held by Kris Mayes.

As Commissioner Mayes will occasionally vote in the public interest instead of the corporate interest, she is considered a RINO who is hated by by the Pearce/Kavanagh/Gould wing of the GOP.

...I've been told by people who know him and don't like him that Harper isn't particularly dumb. Perhaps not, but he talks like someone who wants people to think he is smarter than he is, and he does a poor job of it. He spouted off a few times, but I had trouble taking notes because what he said made so little sense.

When the video archive of today's meeting is posted, I recommend watching it.

...Pearce's nativism doesn't extend to a respect for Native Americans. Sen. Albert Hale proposed an amendment to move money ($3 million) from the House of Representatives own budget to re-fund the Commission on Indian Affairs (the commission is zero-funded in the Republican budget proposal).

Pearce suggested that if they really wanted the commission, tribes could fund it out of gaming revenue.

Hale replied that gaming revenue is already shared with the state.

Hale's amendment failed anyway.

...The Republicans were ecstatic over the defeat in California of a number of referenda to help balance that state's budget, including some proposed tax hikes. They're using that defeat as carte blanche to ignore the possibility of a small tax increase in favor of balancing the state's budget on the back of AZ's children.

..."Cap'n Al" Melvin may not be quite on the same level of idiocy as Jack Harper, but he hasn't met a name that he couldn't massacre.

...The Reps were on message, even when that message was no more than ignorant BS. Their favorite talking point during the meeting was that not repealing the county equalization tax (the property tax that even though it's call a "county" tax is actually for education) counts as a tax increase.

...In keeping with the "on message" vibe, at one point during the debate, Pearce transitioned from the state needing to help abused children to needing to implement tort reform.

Huh???

Other impressions -

...I was fortunate to meet Kit Filbey, former vice chair of the MCDP and current vice chair of the GEMDEMS. She's intelligent and articulate, and was absolutely outraged at what she witnessed at the hearing.

And if you don't think my words here adequately convey the ugliness of the meeting (and they don't; I just don't have the vocabulary to fully express my own outrage at this mess), talk to her. She took copious notes during the meeting and will be able to fill in a lot of what I've missed here.

...Most of the Democratic senators of the committee were unyielding in their defense of AZ's most vulnerable. Senators Aboud, Aguirre, and Rios fought the Reps at every turn. Sen. Hale was skillful in his use of the "quiet" support technique. :))

...The Reps are *really* pissed over the criticisms they've been taking from the education community, moaning about AEA and union "lies" and "phony" pink slips, saying that after all is said and done, few or no teachers will be laid off.

...Pearce doesn't have a soul. During an amendment ot restore $167K to DES for food bank funding, he recited a story of how family was so poor when he was growing up that his mother had to work "two or three" jobs, strongly hinting that the people who have lost their jobs should just go out and get another.

Even if there are fewer jobs to get.

...Gould doesn't have a soul either. During debate on an amendment to restore funding for domestic violence services, he chimed in with "The best cure for poverty is a job."

As Kit Filbey pointed out, a job has nothing to do with domestic violence.

...Gould also protested that most of the proposed Democratic amendments were crafted to make Republicans look bad.

Senator Aboud retorted that it isn't amendments that are making Republicans look bad.

That one earned more than a few grins.

...And I am really glad that I left the meeting when I did. I've had the stream of the meeting going in the background as I type this, and more than once I've flipped off my computer screen at something that was said by a Rep, usually Gould or Pearce.

Lest you think that Jack Harper mellowed out during the course of the meeting, I have to tell you - he left even before I did. Apparently his daughter is graduating from something tonight.

Anyway, time to go and decompress so I can get to sleep at a reasonable hour.

Later!

Over three hours into the meeting...

...and just one bill completed. I'm out of here. I'll do a more complete write-up when I get home.

For the record, after that three hours, after the rejection of every Democratic amendment to try to soften the blow on the state's most vulnerable populations, public testimony that was unanimously opposed to the proposed budget, the Republican budget bill (striker to SB1188) passed on a party-line vote.

BTW - they spent around 15 minutes conducting the actual vote on the bill (most of them wanted to explain their votes). During that period, Ron Gould spent most of the time looking up AC units on the internet (presumably for his business in Lake Havasu)...If I got any good pics, I'll upload them later.

This explains a lot...

This meeting has turned into a Republican dogma indoctrination session, with Pearce leading the way, ably supported by his ideological saddle partners Gould, Harper, Sylvia Allen and Melvin.

The most illuminating quote, from discussion of one of the many Democratic amendments to support the children, the poor, and the disabled members of our community, Pearce said in support of his opposition to the amendment

"We're here to represent the taxpayers."

I guess that since most children aren't in a position to pay taxes, they don't deserve any consideration from elected officials.

Later...

Senate Approps...slow going

Ninety minutes in and still working on the amendments to the first bill. So far, all Demcratic amendments to help DES, the universities, K-12 ed, etc., have been defeated on party line votes.

More later...

Senate Approps meeting running late

It looks as if today's Senate Approps meeting won't be starting until 12:30, allegedly to allow the Democratic members to craft amendment proposals.

In other words, if you wanted to attend the meeting, you still have time to get here.

Get here soon, though - it's SRO time in SHR109.

Remaining BRBs

I'm getting too tired for more analyses, so here are links to the other budget bills on Wednesday's Senate Approps agenda -

Capital outlay, striker to SB1027

Criminal Justice BRB, striker to SB1028

(Sale of) Assets, striker to SB1031

General Government BRB, striker to SB1035

General Revenues, striker to SB1036

Health and Welfare BRB, striker to SB1145

General Appropriations, striker to SB1188

Environment BRB, striker to SB1258

The AZ Senate Democrats have posted a link to a .pdf summary of the budget proposal here.

Anyway, I hope to see some of you at Wednesday's committee meeting.

Good night!

Senate BRB - K - 12 Education

Oh, this one has a couple of real gems...

This is from a proposed striker to SB1187 (ALL CAPS INDICATES NEW LANGUAGE) -

ARS 15-185, Section B, paragraph 4 is changed to increase charter school equalization assistance -

Equalization assistance for the charter school shall be determined by adding the amount of the base support level and additional assistance. The amount of the additional assistance is one thousand four hundred seventy-four dollars sixteen cents ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED FORTY-TWO DOLLARS FIFTY-ONE CENTS per student count in kindergarten programs and grades one through eight and one thousand seven hundred eighteen dollars ten cents ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED NINETY-SEVEN DOLLARS SEVENTY-SEVEN CENTS per student count in grades nine through twelve.

ARS 15-342 sections 27 and 34 are changed to allow school districts to sell advertising on school buses and school websites.

(Gem #1) ARS 15-502 is change to add - "THE GOVERNING BOARD SHALL REMOVE UNION REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE SCHOOL DISTRICT PAYROLL."

(Gem #2) ARS 15-504 is added -

PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS WHO ENGAGE IN LOBBYING ACTIVITIES DURING REGULAR SCHOOL HOURS ARE REQUIRED TO REIMBURSE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OR CHARTER SCHOOL WHERE THEY ARE EMPLOYED FOR THE COST OF HIRING A SUBSTITUTE TEACHER FOR EACH SCHOOL DAY OR PORTION OF A SCHOOL DAY THAT A SUBSTITUTE TEACHER WAS HIRED BECAUSE THAT TEACHER ENGAGED IN LOBBYING ACTIVITY. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, LOBBYING DOES NOT INCLUDE CONDUCT THAT OCCURS DURING A FIELD TRIP FOR PUPILS.

ARS 15-821 is amended so that school districts do not receive two years of state aid payments for students who take kindergarten early (before age 5) and then retake kindergarten. (I don't actually have a problem with this one.)

(Gem #3) ARS 15-901, section B, paragraph 2 decreases base-level state funding for public schools from $3291.42 in school year 2008-2009 to $3201.89 in 2009-2010. Remember the increase for charter schools?

ARS 15-910, section K, paragraph 7 is added to cap monies expended on desegregation efforts to no more than the level spent in 2008-2009. Remember, this striker is proposed by the same guy who hates immigrants and sent out links to a white supremacist website as part of his 2006 campaign.

ARS 15-918.04, section C is added to close the career ladder program to new teachers.

ARS 15-923, section E is added to compel school districts to compensate parents who choose to drive their children to school themselves or make arrangements with other transportation providers. Section F adds the restriction that school districts don't have to reimburse parents for the transportation of the students from other districts or attendance areas within the same district unless the student is enrolled in a special education program.

ARS 42-17151, sections C and D are added to limit the ability of school districts to raise tax levies. Which is a nice two-step on the part of the lege - sweep up any fund balances that may have been built up to pay for capital projects and the like, and then inhibit the ability of the public schools to make up the difference the only way that they can.


More later... (maybe one more before I have to head to bed)

The Senate budget proposal...Higher Ed BRB

On Wednesday, the AZ Senate's Appropriations Committee will be considering a number of bills related to a budget proposal.

The cynic in me (which as any regular reader knows is never far from the surface) believes that the short notice of the hearing is to minimize the ability of those affected by the bills to organize an effective response.

Note: Since I'm trying to do the analyses on the fly, there will probably be some mistakes. I'll correct them when they are brought to my attention, but I strongly advise folks who are interested in these topics to read the relevant BRBs.

Here are some of the lowlights of the proposals, starting with the Higher Education budget reconciliation bill (striker to SB1029) (THEIR EMPHASIS INDICATING NEW LANGUAGE) -

(h/t to commenter testcase for spotting this)

ARS 15-1626,

section A, paragraph 5 - All other tuition and fee revenue shall beretained by each university for expenditure as approved by the board, except that APPROPRIATED BY THE LEGISLATURE

section B. THE BOARD SHALL NOT ALLOW ANY UNIVERSITY UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE BOARD TO REQUIRE ITS STUDENTS TO PURCHASE A MEAL PLAN OR LIVE IN ON-CAMPUS HOUSING.


15-1682.03

Eliminates new buildings and cuts the allowance for capital outlays from $800 million to $167,671,200.


There are also a number of changes to reporting and calculation functions that I've seen in other bills that never made it into law, but I don't understand the actual impact of them to comment on them.

At first glance, we should all be scared of their scheme to grab all of the state universities' revenue for themselves; it's one step from the lege actually setting tuition and fees directly. Once that happens, they'll be able to raise taxes on students and their families without looking like they're raising taxes.

More BRBs later...

Breaking - Senate Appropriations to consider budget proposal Wednesday morning

A newly-posted agenda for Senate Approps has the committee meeting at 11 a.m. (or upon adjournment of Senate Public Safety) in SHR1 to consider a budget proposal, a capital outlay proposal, and eight budget reconciliation bills (BRBs).

I couldn't find the text of the bills online as yet (I'm on the go, and can't really sit down for a thorough search right now...and they may not even be up yet), but an AP article (via MSN Money) talks about municipal impact fee grabs, privatizing prisons, and, of course, massive cuts to education and human services.

More later after I get home...

ACSTO, HY Processing and Steve Yarbrough

Edit on 5/19 to add link to AZ Republic article at end of post...

The Republicans in the lege are rushing headlong toward a special session in order to "fix" AZ's unconstitutional school vouchers law.

They may be successful in this effort (they've got the votes to implement their ideology and a pliable governor on the ninth floor), but they may come to regret that rush, as it is causing people to look closely at the organizations that benefit from school voucher/tax credit funds...

David Safier has an excellent post up concerning some of the financial activities of Rep. Steve Yarbrough's real job as director of the Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization (ACSTO).

In it, he sheds some light on ACSTO's massive increase in "processing expenses" at the same time that Yarbrough incorporated "HY Processing, LLC" in October of 2005.

ACSTO's processing expenses went from $24K in 2005 to over $360K in 2006 and even higher in 2007.

Hmmm....

Anyway, IRS has rules for 501c3 organizations covering this situation (I think this is relevant- I'm not a tax attorney) -

The organization must not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests, and no part of a section 501(c)(3) organization's net earnings may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual. If the organization engages in an excess benefit transaction with a person having substantial influence over the
organization, an excise tax may be imposed on the person and any organization managers agreeing to the transaction.

That "excess benefit transaction" clause seems to be especially relevant. From the IRS's page regarding the subject -

An excess benefit transaction is a transaction in which an economic benefit is provided by an applicable tax-exempt organization, directly or indirectly, to or for the use of a disqualified person, and the value of the economic benefit provided by the organization exceeds the value of the consideration received by the organization.

{snip}

In addition, if a supporting organization makes a grant, loan, payment of compensation, or similar payment to a substantial contributor of the organization, the arrangement is an excess benefit transaction. The entire amount of the payment is taxable as an excess benefit.

A quick check of Arizona Corporation Commission and AZ Secretary of State records show that both HY Processing LLC and ACSTO list almost the same address - 7517 S McClintock Dr. in Tempe , #107 for ACSTO and #109 for HY Processing.

Right now, I can't state unequivocally that HY Processing is being used to launder ACSTO monies into Yarbrough's personal accounts, but if Rep. Yarbrough's field of legal specialization isn't in criminal or tax law, he may want to consider putting both a criminal lawyer and a tax attorney on retainer.

Highly-skilled ones.

Kudos to David Safier for spotting the "processing" activity in ACSTO's paperwork - I've looked at the paperwork many times but never spotted that juicy tidbit.

Edit: on 5/19, the Arizona Republic ran an article on this very subject. In addition to the stuff in the Blog for AZ post and this post, it also covers how ACSTO paid almost $45K in rent to Yarbrough, who, as it turns out, owns the office building that houses both ACSTO and KY Processing.

Further along in the article, Yarbrough asserts that he isn't in violation of the state's ethics laws.

One of Yarbrough's friends should advise him that the IRS doesn't care about state ethics laws.

End edit...

Shadegg and Flake can't *both* change their names to "Scrooge", can they?

Earlier today, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H. Res. 442, a resolution "[r]ecognizing the importance of the Child and Adult Care Food Program and its positive effect on the lives of low income children and families."

The bill passed by a vote of 377 - 10.

Now this resolution has absolutely no practical effect on the laws of the country or federal spending. In fact, it was such an innocuous and non-controversial bill that even Trent Franks (R-AZ2) could find it in his heart to support it.

Trent Franks!!!

However, Franks was alone among the AZGOPers - Jeff Flake (R-AZ6) and John Shadegg (R-AZ3) voted against this resolution. Apparently, the hardcore ideologues are so opposed to any government social programs that benefit low income Americans that they won't even vote to acknowledge the success or even the necessity of one of those programs.

I sort of understand Flake's perspective - he hates everything. But what's up with Shadegg? He's enough of a politician to occasionally vote for bills that are of the "feel good but meaningless” variety.

Perhaps Shadegg is trying to get back in the good graces of the conservative wing of the GOP after his bout of honesty last week.

Later...

Is the bill logjam in the Senate loosening up?

All session, per the dictates of Senate President Bob Burns, the AZ Senate hasn't considered non-budget related bills.

This had led to weeks of committee agendas loaded with presentations and executive appointments, but light on actual substance (other than by the standards of those presentations and executive appointees, anyway :) ).

There have been a couple of exceptions, the most notable of which was the infamous "guns in parking lots" bill, but for the most part, the senators have been bored of their @$$es.

That seems to be changing this week. The Senate Public Safety and Human Services Committee has posted a revised agenda for its meeting this week (Wednesday, 10:30 a.m., SHR3). On that agenda is consideration of the appointment of Neal Young as Director of DES and of two bills -

SB1049____fingerprint clearance cards(Gray L)

**/***/****SB1155____trust lands; conservation; technical correction(Pierce S, Nelson)

All the asterisks mean for SB1155 is that consideration of the bill is pending a suspension of Senate Rules, the assigment of the bill to the committee, and the offering of a strike everything amendment.

The striker is listed as relating to "elections; hospital districts". The text of the striker isn't available online as yet, but the House has already passed HB2155 relating to the same topic. That bill would allow "for an election for a hospital district with less than ten thousand people to reauthorize an existing secondary property tax that supports the operations of a hospital." That bill carries a deadline for such an election of June 30, 2009 and requires a minimum of 30 days' notice.

Assuming that the proposed striker has the same language as the already-passed House bill, that would explain the rush on the bill.

Both bills on the committee agenda have "emergency" clauses attached to them so that they become law immediately upon the signature of the governor. For the emergency clause to be effective, the bills must pass the respective chambers by a 2/3 vote.

Looking at the bills, or one of the bill and the possible language of a striker on the other, they are measures that require immediate passage and cannot wait for the budget to pass before they are enacted.

In other words, no real loosening of the logjam yet, just work on bills that should have taken place months ago.

More later...

The text of President Obama's commencement speech at Notre Dame

The speech, as prepared for delivery, courtesy AP via AZCentral.com -

Thank you, Father Jenkins, for that generous introduction. You are doing an outstanding job as president of this fine institution, and your continued and courageous commitment to honest, thoughtful dialogue is an inspiration to us all. Good afternoon, Father Hesburgh, Notre Dame trustees, faculty, family, friends and the class of 2009. I am honored to be here today and grateful to all of you for allowing me to be part of your graduation.

I want to thank you for this honorary degree. I know it has not been without controversy. I don't know if you're aware of this, but these honorary degrees are apparently pretty hard to come by. So far I'm only 1 for 2 as president. Father Hesburgh is 150 for 150. I guess that's better. Father Ted, after the ceremony, maybe you can give me some pointers on how to boost my average.

I also want to congratulate the class of 2009 for all your accomplishments. And since this is Notre Dame, I mean both in the classroom and in the competitive arena. We all know about this university's proud and storied football team, but I also hear that Notre Dame holds the largest outdoor 5-on-5 basketball tournament in the world - Bookstore Basketball.

Now this excites me. I want to congratulate the winners of this year's tournament, a team by the name of "Hallelujah Holla Back." Well done. Though I have to say, I am personally disappointed that the "Barack O'Ballers" didn't pull it out. Next year, if you need a 6-foot, 2-inch forward with a decent jumper, you know where I live.

Every one of you should be proud of what you have achieved at this institution. One hundred and sixty-three classes of Notre Dame graduates have sat where you are today. Some were here during years that simply rolled into the next without much notice or fanfare - periods of relative peace and prosperity that required little by way of sacrifice or struggle.

You, however, are not getting off that easy. Your class has come of age at a moment of great consequence for our nation and the world - a rare inflection point in history where the size and scope of the challenges before us require that we remake our world to renew its promise; that we align our deepest values and commitments to the demands of a new age. It is a privilege and a responsibility afforded to few generations - and a task that you are now called to fulfill.

This is the generation that must find a path back to prosperity and decide how we respond to a global economy that left millions behind even before this crisis hit - an economy where greed and short-term thinking were too often rewarded at the expense of fairness, and diligence, and an honest day's work.

We must decide how to save God's creation from a changing climate that threatens to destroy it. We must seek peace at a time when there are those who will stop at nothing to do us harm, and when weapons in the hands of a few can destroy the many. And we must find a way to reconcile our ever-shrinking world with its ever-growing diversity - diversity of thought, of culture and of belief.

In short, we must find a way to live together as one human family.

It is this last challenge that I'd like to talk about today. For the major threats we face in the 21st century - whether it's global recession or violent extremism, the spread of nuclear weapons or pandemic disease - do not discriminate. They do not recognize borders. They do not see color. They do not target specific ethnic groups.

Moreover, no one person, or religion, or nation can meet these challenges alone. Our very survival has never required greater cooperation and understanding among all people from all places than at this moment in history.

Unfortunately, finding that common ground - recognizing that our fates are tied up, as Dr. King said, in a "single garment of destiny" - is not easy. Part of the problem, of course, lies in the imperfections of man - our selfishness, our pride, our stubbornness, our acquisitiveness, our insecurities, our egos; all the cruelties large and small that those of us in the Christian tradition understand to be rooted in original sin. We too often seek advantage over others. We cling to outworn prejudice and fear those who are unfamiliar. Too many of us view life only through the lens of immediate self-interest and crass materialism; in which the world is necessarily a zero-sum game. The strong too often dominate the weak, and too many of those with wealth and with power find all manner of justification for their own privilege in the face of poverty and injustice. And so, for all our technology and scientific advances, we see around the globe violence and want and strife that would seem sadly familiar to those in ancient times.

We know these things; and hopefully one of the benefits of the wonderful education you have received is that you have had time to consider these wrongs in the world, and grown determined, each in your own way, to right them. And yet, one of the vexing things for those of us interested in promoting greater understanding and cooperation among people is the discovery that even bringing together persons of good will, men and women of principle and purpose, can be difficult.

The soldier and the lawyer may both love this country with equal passion, and yet reach very different conclusions on the specific steps needed to protect us from harm. The gay activist and the evangelical pastor may both deplore the ravages of HIV/AIDS, but find themselves unable to bridge the cultural divide that might unite their efforts. Those who speak out against stem cell research may be rooted in admirable conviction about the sacredness of life, but so are the parents of a child with juvenile diabetes who are convinced that their son's or daughter's hardships can be relieved.

The question, then, is how do we work through these conflicts? Is it possible for us to join hands in common effort? As citizens of a vibrant and varied democracy, how do we engage in vigorous debate? How does each of us remain firm in our principles, and fight for what we consider right, without demonizing those with just as strongly held convictions on the other side?

Nowhere do these questions come up more powerfully than on the issue of abortion.

As I considered the controversy surrounding my visit here, I was reminded of an encounter I had during my Senate campaign, one that I describe in a book I wrote called "The Audacity of Hope." A few days after I won the Democratic nomination, I received an e-mail from a doctor who told me that while he voted for me in the primary, he had a serious concern that might prevent him from voting for me in the general election. He described himself as a Christian who was strongly pro-life, but that's not what was preventing him from voting for me.

What bothered the doctor was an entry that my campaign staff had posted on my Web site - an entry that said I would fight "right-wing ideologues who want to take away a woman's right to choose." The doctor said that he had assumed I was a reasonable person, but that if I truly believed that every pro-life individual was simply an ideologue who wanted to inflict suffering on women, then I was not very reasonable. He wrote, "I do not ask at this point that you oppose abortion, only that you speak about this issue in fair-minded words."

Fair-minded words.

After I read the doctor's letter, I wrote back to him and thanked him. I didn't change my position, but I did tell my staff to change the words on my Web site. And I said a prayer that night that I might extend the same presumption of good faith to others that the doctor had extended to me. Because when we do that - when we open our hearts and our minds to those who may not think like we do or believe what we do - that's when we discover at least the possibility of common ground.

That's when we begin to say, "Maybe we won't agree on abortion, but we can still agree that this is a heart-wrenching decision for any woman to make, with both moral and spiritual dimensions. So let's work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies, and making adoption more available, and providing care and support for women who do carry their child to term. Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded in clear ethics and sound science, as well as respect for the equality of women."

Understand - I do not suggest that the debate surrounding abortion can or should go away. No matter how much we may want to fudge it - indeed, while we know that the views of most Americans on the subject are complex and even contradictory - the fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable. Each side will continue to make its case to the public with passion and conviction. But surely we can do so without reducing those with differing views to caricature.

Open hearts. Open minds. Fair-minded words.

It's a way of life that has always been the Notre Dame tradition. Father Hesburgh has long spoken of this institution as both a lighthouse and a crossroads. The lighthouse that stands apart, shining with the wisdom of the Catholic tradition, while the crossroads is where "differences of culture and religion and conviction can coexist with friendship, civility, hospitality and especially love." And I want to join him and Father Jenkins in saying how inspired I am by the maturity and responsibility with which this class has approached the debate surrounding today's ceremony.

This tradition of cooperation and understanding is one that I learned in my own life many years ago - also with the help of the Catholic Church.

I was not raised in a particularly religious household, but my mother instilled in me a sense of service and empathy that eventually led me to become a community organizer after I graduated college. A group of Catholic churches in Chicago helped fund an organization known as the Developing Communities Project, and we worked to lift up South Side neighborhoods that had been devastated when the local steel plant closed.

It was quite an eclectic crew. Catholic and Protestant churches. Jewish and African-American organizers. Working-class black and white and Hispanic residents. All of us with different experiences. All of us with different beliefs. But all of us learned to work side by side because all of us saw in these neighborhoods other human beings who needed our help - to find jobs and improve schools. We were bound together in the service of others.

And something else happened during the time I spent in those neighborhoods. Perhaps because the church folks I worked with were so welcoming and understanding; perhaps because they invited me to their services and sang with me from their hymnals; perhaps because I witnessed all of the good works their faith inspired them to perform, I found myself drawn - not just to work with the church, but to be in the church. It was through this service that I was brought to Christ.

At the time, Cardinal Joseph Bernardin was the archbishop of Chicago. For those of you too young to have known him, he was a kind and good and wise man. A saintly man. I can still remember him speaking at one of the first organizing meetings I attended on the South Side. He stood as both a lighthouse and a crossroads - unafraid to speak his mind on moral issues ranging from poverty, AIDS and abortion to the death penalty and nuclear war. And yet, he was congenial and gentle in his persuasion, always trying to bring people together; always trying to find common ground. Just before he died, a reporter asked Cardinal Bernardin about this approach to his ministry. And he said, "You can't really get on with preaching the Gospel until you've touched minds and hearts."

My heart and mind were touched by the words and deeds of the men and women I worked alongside with in Chicago. And I'd like to think that we touched the hearts and minds of the neighborhood families whose lives we helped change. For this, I believe, is our highest calling.

You are about to enter the next phase of your life at a time of great uncertainty. You will be called upon to help restore a free market that is also fair to all who are willing to work; to seek new sources of energy that can save our planet; to give future generations the same chance that you had to receive an extraordinary education. And whether as a person drawn to public service, or someone who simply insists on being an active citizen, you will be exposed to more opinions and ideas broadcast through more means of communications than have ever existed before. You will hear talking heads scream on cable, read blogs that claim definitive knowledge, and watch politicians pretend to know what they're talking about. Occasionally, you may also have the great fortune of seeing important issues debated by well-intentioned, brilliant minds. In fact, I suspect that many of you will be among those bright stars.

In this world of competing claims about what is right and what is true, have confidence in the values with which you've been raised and educated. Be unafraid to speak your mind when those values are at stake. Hold firm to your faith and allow it to guide you on your journey. Stand as a lighthouse.

But remember too that the ultimate irony of faith is that it necessarily admits doubt. It is the belief in things not seen. It is beyond our capacity as human beings to know with certainty what God has planned for us or what he asks of us, and those of us who believe must trust that his wisdom is greater than our own.

This doubt should not push us away from our faith. But it should humble us. It should temper our passions, and cause us to be wary of self-righteousness. It should compel us to remain open, and curious, and eager to continue the moral and spiritual debate that began for so many of you within the walls of Notre Dame. And within our vast democracy, this doubt should remind us to persuade through reason, through an appeal whenever we can to universal rather than parochial principles, and most of all through an abiding example of good works, charity, kindness and service that moves hearts and minds.

For if there is one law that we can be most certain of, it is the law that binds people of all faiths and no faith together. It is no coincidence that it exists in Christianity and Judaism; in Islam and Hinduism; in Buddhism and humanism. It is, of course, the golden rule - the call to treat one another as we wish to be treated. The call to love. To serve. To do what we can to make a difference in the lives of those with whom we share the same brief moment on this earth.

So many of you at Notre Dame - by the last count, upwards of 80 percent - have lived this law of love through the service you've performed at schools and hospitals; international relief agencies and local charities. That is incredibly impressive, and a powerful testament to this institution. Now you must carry the tradition forward. Make it a way of life. Because when you serve, it doesn't just improve your community, it makes you a part of your community. It breaks down walls. It fosters cooperation. And when that happens - when people set aside their differences to work in common effort toward a common good; when they struggle together, and sacrifice together, and learn from one another - all things are possible.

After all, I stand here today, as president and as an African-American, on the 55th anniversary of the day that the Supreme Court handed down the decision in Brown v. the Board of Education. Brown was of course the first major step in dismantling the separate but equal doctrine, but it would take a number of years and a nationwide movement to fully realize the dream of civil rights for all of God's children. There were freedom rides and lunch counters and Billy clubs, and there was also a Civil Rights Commission appointed by President Eisenhower. It was the 12 resolutions recommended by this commission that would ultimately become law in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

There were six members of the commission. It included five whites and one African-American; Democrats and Republicans; two Southern governors, the dean of a Southern law school, a Midwestern university president, and your own Father Ted Hesburgh, president of Notre Dame. They worked for two years, and at times, President Eisenhower had to intervene personally since no hotel or restaurant in the South would serve the black and white members of the commission together. Finally, when they reached an impasse in Louisiana, Father Ted flew them all to Notre Dame's retreat in Land O' Lakes, Wis., where they eventually overcame their differences and hammered out a final deal.

Years later, President Eisenhower asked Father Ted how on Earth he was able to broker an agreement between men of such different backgrounds and beliefs. And Father Ted simply said that during their first dinner in Wisconsin, they discovered that they were all fishermen. And so he quickly readied a boat for a twilight trip out on the lake. They fished, and they talked, and they changed the course of history.

I will not pretend that the challenges we face will be easy, or that the answers will come quickly, or that all our differences and divisions will fade happily away. Life is not that simple. It never has been.

But as you leave here today, remember the lessons of Cardinal Bernardin, of Father Hesburgh, of movements for change both large and small. Remember that each of us, endowed with the dignity possessed by all children of God, has the grace to recognize ourselves in one another; to understand that we all seek the same love of family and the same fulfillment of a life well-lived. Remember that in the end, we are all fishermen.

If nothing else, that knowledge should give us faith that through our collective labor, and God's providence, and our willingness to shoulder each other's burdens, America will continue on its precious journey towards that more perfect union. Congratulations on your graduation, may God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.

"1 for 2" in the honorary degree department? Hmmm...I wonder what he is referring to there. :)

The coming week...budget crunch time is fast approaching

As usual, all info culled from the websites of the relevant political bodies and subject to change without notice...

...In the U.S. House, there aren't any post office namings (it's taken a while, but perhaps they've run out of post offices in need of renaming...OK, they're probably just catching their breath :) ), but there are a number of issues up for debate this week.

- There is a House amendment to S. 896, the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009. I couldn't find the text of the amendment, but there is a House Rules Committee hearing on it on Monday at 5:00 p.m.

- S.386, the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, as amended. This should pass, as it passed 92 - 4 in the Senate on April 28 (our own Jon Kyl was one of the four senators to vote in support of bank fraud, naturally :) ). This one passed the House already (with AZ's Flake, Franks, and Shadegg supporter fraudsters) (naturally :)) ), but there were differences between the Senate version and the House version. Those have been ironed out, and this amended version may pass on a voice vote.

- H.R. 2352, the Job Creation Through Entrepreneurship Act of 2009. If passed, the bill would created a number of programs within the Small Business Administration to encourage and facilitate entrepeneurship, including among veterans, women, Native Americans, and those from socially and economically disadvantaged backgrounds.

The Republicans claim to support small businesses, but they will hate this one.

It'll pass anyway. :)

- H.R. 915 and H.R. 2200, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009 and the Transportation Security Administration Authorization Act of 2009, respectively. These are money bills, and there are always fights over money bills. Look for Jeff Flake to propose a couple of his cookie-cutter anti-earmark amendments.


...Over in the AZ lege, the floor schedule looks to be a light one pending developments on the budget front. The most controversial item appears to be on the House COW calendar.

They'll be considering HB2533, one of John Kavanagh's slate of anti-immigrant bills. The chair of the House Appropriations Committee wants to make it a class one misdemeanor to stand next to or in a roadway while soliciting employment from someone in a motor vehicle.

A class one misdemeanor carries a penalty of up to six months in jail and a fine of $2500 (plus surcharges).

Ask for a job, go to jail...Actually, "Have brown skin, ask for a job, go to jail." Niiiiice...

- In committee action, House Rules is meeting on Monday at 1 p.m. in HHR4. So far, that's the only House committee with an agenda posted.

Over in the Senate, the only committee agenda of interest (there are a couple of meetings to consider executive appointments) is Thursday's meeting of the Appropriations Committee at 9 a.m. in SHR1.

In a move that looks calculated to synch up with his nativist saddle partner's bill in House COW, Russell Pearce, the chair of Senate Approps, is forcing his committee to sit through a presentation on "Sanctuary Cities and the Cost to the State and its Citizens."

OK, "forcing" might be an overstatement - besides Pearce, the Republican members of the committee include Jack Harper, Pam Gorman, Ron Gould, Al Melvin, and Steve Pierce.

They live and breathe this stuff.


While the legislative Republicans fiddle with various ways to attack immigrants, every other level of government burns the midnight oil trying to fashion their annual budgets without knowing with certainty what their revenue will be. To whit...

...The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors is holding an informal meeting on Monday at 10 a.m. in the Supervisor's Auditorium. The agenda is almost wholly devoted to FY10 budgets.

Wednesday's Formal meeting of the supes is filled with many mundane items, but there are some eyebrow-raising ones, too.

The best? Item 10 is a move by Joe Arpaio to get his hands on the $1.6 million earmark for him in the lege's 2009 budget fix. He wants to increase his staff by 15 positions - all deputies dedicated to his anti-immigrant putsch.

While all other County departments have to make cuts. Nice.


...The Governing Board of the Maricopa Integrated Health District will hold a special meeting on Thursday at 3 p.m. in the Maricopa Medical Center.

The one item on the agenda? The FY2010 budget presentation for the Maricopa Health Plan. The budget is based on 5% provider fee cuts and an assumption of fewer "in-patient" days.

Interesting combination - cut already-low provider pay, reducing the the number of healthcare providers interested in working with/for MHP, and expect that the resulting degradation of quality of patient care will result patients needing fewer days in the hospital?

Who worked on the budget proposal, Pollyanna?


...On Tuesday night at 5, the Scottsdale City Council will be meeting in the City Hall Kiva. The agenda includes fee and rate hikes for the coming fiscal year and the FY10 operating budget and capital improvement plan.


...Over at the Central Arizona Project, the Finance, Audit, and Power Committee is meeting at 1:15 p.m on Thursday to discuss tax rates for the 2009/2010 tax year. The committee meeting will follow a meeting of the entire Board of Directors in a work/study session at 9 a.m. to discuss rates, taxes, and reserves for the coming year.


...The Board of Directors of Valley Metro will meet on Thursday at 12:45 p.m. to consider its preliminary operating and capital budget for FY2010. They aren't planning any cuts; in fact, the proposed budget is roughly 10% higher than the last one due to increase in bus service and in some contracted rates. The interesting part is where the increased bus service will be handled by the same number of employees (127) as this year. In addition (in a move certain to warm the hearts of anti-public employee Republicans everywhere), the budget doesn't include any raises for employees (merit, step, or even COLA).

In other words, the same staff is going to face an increased workload without even a token COLA (cost of living adjustment) to their compensation? Nice.

I've got a solution, or at least the beginning of a solution, for the state lege's dallying on the budget. Change the rules of both chambers - pass a budget through to the Governor by April 1, or no other bills can be considered until one is passed. And if May 1 arrives without a budget, no pay (salary or per diem) until one is passed.

It won't happen, but if they have time for immigrant-bashing, they have time to work on the budget.


...In non-budget related meetings (yes, there is at least one of those)....

- The Arizona Corporation Commission will hold a Securities and Safety meeting on Wednesday at 10 a.m.


- The Tempe City Council, Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District, the Arizona Board of Regents, and the Citizens Clean Elections Commission are not meeting this week.

Later...

Quelland Out

From AZCentral.com -

The Citizens Clean Elections Commission voted Friday to remove Rep. Doug Quelland from office and assess $45,500 in penalties for campaign-finance violations.

Quelland, who has championed the state's pioneering public-finance law, indicated through his attorney that he has been trying over the last few weeks to reach a settlement that would avoid the requirement that he forfeit his office.

There won't be a special election to fill the seat; the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors will choose a replacement for Quelland from a slate of three candidates chosen by the Republican PCs of his district.

In practice (though not in law, so strange things could happen), this means that the County Supervisor whose district covers Quelland's will select the replacement and the rest of the supes will rubberstamp the decision. I think that Quelland's district, LD10, falls into BOS chair Max Wilson's district (SD4), though it could be SD3, Andy Kunasek's.

More later...