Who knew that good ol' JD was part of the "T" part of the LGBT community?
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Did Fox News break some actual news?*
*- It has to be "actual" news, since FNC could *never* be wrong...right? LOL
Who knew that good ol' JD was part of the "T" part of the LGBT community?
Who knew that good ol' JD was part of the "T" part of the LGBT community?
Monday, February 22, 2010
The coming week: Legislative Edition, Chapter 4 - Tuesday
Because of some unexpected developments, I wasn't able to do a complete examination of this week's committee schedule, nor was I able to visit the lege on Monday (missing some interesting happenings like Sen. Jonathan Paton's resignation from the Senate in order to run for Congress, and Tom Horne's demonstration of why he doesn't have the temperment or professionalism to be the state's Attorney General.) Fortunately, those events were covered in other blogs.
Here are Tuesday's committee schedule and highlights:
On the House side of the quad -
- House Public Employees, Retirement, and Entitlement Reform will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR3. The agenda is a short one (two items). The more interesting of the two seems to be HB2344, barring "public employees" from engaging in lobbying or political activities during work hours. This one seems to be directed at teachers and others such as day care or health care workers who have objected to some of the lege's attacks on their areas of the budget.
- House Government will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR4.
Highlights:
HB2382, a bill that mandates that schools report all sorts of data regarding students who are unable to "prove lawful presence in the United States." Nativist election year posturing.
HB2395, barring school boards from authorizing payroll deductions for union dues. More payback for last year's criticisms and protests from the educators in the state.
HB2441, a "birther" bill regarding qualification of presidential candidates that must be proven before a candidate's name can be placed on the ballot.
A striker to HB2641, to override local regulation of "consumer fireworks." I don't know which lobbyist is paying for this one, but they must be paying well - this one has died before but it keeps coming back. This time it has been resurrected by Rep. Judy Burges.
HCR2039, a proposed amendment to the AZ constitution that would allow the lege to "suspend" voter protected funding via a majority vote of the lege. Given that this lege has proven beyond any doubt that it is utterly incapable of governing responsibly, or of even wanting to do so, this one is badbadbadbadBADBADBADBAD.
HCR2041, a proposed amendment to the AZ constitution to require a periodic reauthorization of voter mandated spending. Another legislative attempt to completely wrest control of the state away from the voters, particularly when those voters approve something that the Kool-Aid drinkers don't like.
- House Environment will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR5. Looks quiet thus far.
On the Senate side of the quad -
- Senate Commerce and Economic Development will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1.
Highlight:
SB1126, Sen. Al Melvin's assertion that the federal government cannot regulate nuclear fuel that is produced and used in Arizona. Even if this one passes into law, the feds may have a slight difference of opinion with Melvin on the matter.
- Senate Appropriations will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR109; that agenda was covered in an earlier post.
Later...
Here are Tuesday's committee schedule and highlights:
On the House side of the quad -
- House Public Employees, Retirement, and Entitlement Reform will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR3. The agenda is a short one (two items). The more interesting of the two seems to be HB2344, barring "public employees" from engaging in lobbying or political activities during work hours. This one seems to be directed at teachers and others such as day care or health care workers who have objected to some of the lege's attacks on their areas of the budget.
- House Government will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR4.
Highlights:
HB2382, a bill that mandates that schools report all sorts of data regarding students who are unable to "prove lawful presence in the United States." Nativist election year posturing.
HB2395, barring school boards from authorizing payroll deductions for union dues. More payback for last year's criticisms and protests from the educators in the state.
HB2441, a "birther" bill regarding qualification of presidential candidates that must be proven before a candidate's name can be placed on the ballot.
A striker to HB2641, to override local regulation of "consumer fireworks." I don't know which lobbyist is paying for this one, but they must be paying well - this one has died before but it keeps coming back. This time it has been resurrected by Rep. Judy Burges.
HCR2039, a proposed amendment to the AZ constitution that would allow the lege to "suspend" voter protected funding via a majority vote of the lege. Given that this lege has proven beyond any doubt that it is utterly incapable of governing responsibly, or of even wanting to do so, this one is badbadbadbadBADBADBADBAD.
HCR2041, a proposed amendment to the AZ constitution to require a periodic reauthorization of voter mandated spending. Another legislative attempt to completely wrest control of the state away from the voters, particularly when those voters approve something that the Kool-Aid drinkers don't like.
- House Environment will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR5. Looks quiet thus far.
On the Senate side of the quad -
- Senate Commerce and Economic Development will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1.
Highlight:
SB1126, Sen. Al Melvin's assertion that the federal government cannot regulate nuclear fuel that is produced and used in Arizona. Even if this one passes into law, the feds may have a slight difference of opinion with Melvin on the matter.
- Senate Appropriations will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR109; that agenda was covered in an earlier post.
Later...
2010 Campaign Committee Update
Some of this material has been covered elsewhere but it merits inclusion here...
...In CD3, attorney Paulina Morris has filed for a run at the R nomination to replace the soon-to-be retired John Shadegg. A name familiar to most AZ political geeks, Lisa Graham Keegan, has signed on as Morris' campaign treasurer. Keegan is a McCain confidant/ally and former State Superintendent of Public Instruction.
...In CD8, R candidate Thomas Carlson has ended his run for the chance to take on Democratic incumbent Gabrielle Giffords. I don't know much about him or his reasons for running, but his reason for dropping out may be related to the fact that he raised a little over $2K for his campaign.
...In CD8, R state senator Jonathan Paton has finally resigned from the Senate to pursue his quest to unseat Giffords. He filed for his run weeks ago, so this wasn't unexpected.
...In CD1, R candidate Thomas Zaleski of Sedona has filed for a run at Democratic incumbent Ann Kirkpatrick.
...In CD5, perennial R candidate Susan Bitter Smith has filed for another run at Democratic incumbent Harry Mitchell. She is a former member of the Scottsdale City Council and a current member of the Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project. She is also a long-time lobbyist, mostly for the telecom/cable TV industry. Her entry into the race has long been rumored, so this isn't exactly a surprise.
...Also in CD5, R candidate Eric Wnuck has withdrawn from the race for his party's nomination. He cited family/business concerns, but a growing field in the R primary and a shrinking pool of available money may have had an impact on his decision, too. In his latest campaign filing, he listed donations at $52K; his first filing listed contributions of over $160K. That's a significant drop during a period when most campaigns are ramping *up* their fundraising efforts.
In Arizona offices...
...State Rep. David Bradley has filed for a run at Arizona Corporation Commission (filer ID 201000475). AZBlueMeanie at Blog for Arizona has coverage here.
...Doug Ducey, a Scottsdale businessman, has filed to enter the race for the Republican nomination for State Treasurer. Ducey is the former CEO of Cold Stone Creamery, so he has deep pockets, but he isn't exactly as popular as Cold Stone.
...In a sign that the Rs consider Democratic Attorney General Terry Goddard to be a very strong candidate, the Republican Governor's Association has set up a PAC in Arizona so that they can expend monies attempting to influence the governor's race this year (filer ID 201000467).
...In Scottsdale, Republican Linda Milhaven, the former Chair of the Scottsdale Cultural Council, has entered the race for Scottsdale City Council. Her entry into the race has long been rumored and isn't a surprise. There are now eight active committees for runs for the three available seats on the Scottsdale City Council.
Later...
...In CD3, attorney Paulina Morris has filed for a run at the R nomination to replace the soon-to-be retired John Shadegg. A name familiar to most AZ political geeks, Lisa Graham Keegan, has signed on as Morris' campaign treasurer. Keegan is a McCain confidant/ally and former State Superintendent of Public Instruction.
...In CD8, R candidate Thomas Carlson has ended his run for the chance to take on Democratic incumbent Gabrielle Giffords. I don't know much about him or his reasons for running, but his reason for dropping out may be related to the fact that he raised a little over $2K for his campaign.
...In CD8, R state senator Jonathan Paton has finally resigned from the Senate to pursue his quest to unseat Giffords. He filed for his run weeks ago, so this wasn't unexpected.
...In CD1, R candidate Thomas Zaleski of Sedona has filed for a run at Democratic incumbent Ann Kirkpatrick.
...In CD5, perennial R candidate Susan Bitter Smith has filed for another run at Democratic incumbent Harry Mitchell. She is a former member of the Scottsdale City Council and a current member of the Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project. She is also a long-time lobbyist, mostly for the telecom/cable TV industry. Her entry into the race has long been rumored, so this isn't exactly a surprise.
...Also in CD5, R candidate Eric Wnuck has withdrawn from the race for his party's nomination. He cited family/business concerns, but a growing field in the R primary and a shrinking pool of available money may have had an impact on his decision, too. In his latest campaign filing, he listed donations at $52K; his first filing listed contributions of over $160K. That's a significant drop during a period when most campaigns are ramping *up* their fundraising efforts.
In Arizona offices...
...State Rep. David Bradley has filed for a run at Arizona Corporation Commission (filer ID 201000475). AZBlueMeanie at Blog for Arizona has coverage here.
...Doug Ducey, a Scottsdale businessman, has filed to enter the race for the Republican nomination for State Treasurer. Ducey is the former CEO of Cold Stone Creamery, so he has deep pockets, but he isn't exactly as popular as Cold Stone.
...In a sign that the Rs consider Democratic Attorney General Terry Goddard to be a very strong candidate, the Republican Governor's Association has set up a PAC in Arizona so that they can expend monies attempting to influence the governor's race this year (filer ID 201000467).
...In Scottsdale, Republican Linda Milhaven, the former Chair of the Scottsdale Cultural Council, has entered the race for Scottsdale City Council. Her entry into the race has long been rumored and isn't a surprise. There are now eight active committees for runs for the three available seats on the Scottsdale City Council.
Later...
Sunday, February 21, 2010
The Coming Week: Legislative Edition, Chapter 3 - Judiciary
As usual, all info gathered from the website of the Arizona lege, except where noted, and subject to change without notice...
...The Senate's Judiciary Committee will meet on Monday at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1.
On the agenda:
- a striker for SB1076 adding "Mixed Martial Arts" to the name of the Arizona State Boxing Commission, and adding rules for MMA to AZ's general laws.
- a striker for SB1081, relating to changes in the process to appoint a non-attorney member to a commission on trial court appointments.
- SB1168 (with a proposed amendment), preempting any local firearms laws.
- SB1292 (with a proposed amendment), eliminating the statute of limitations for civil actions stemming from sexual crimes perpetrated upon minors.
- SB1366 (with proposed amendments here and here), expanding the relocation assistance received by people dislocated by eminent domain activities.
- SB1393 (with proposed amendments here and here), regarding all sort of changes to election laws.
- SB1394, a nativist special from Russell Pearce.
- SB1444 (with a proposed amendment), relating to independent expenditures and campaign finance. AZBlueMeanie at Blog For Arizona has coverage here.
...House Judiciary will meet on Thursday at 9 a.m. in HHR4. Looks quiet thus far...
Later...
...The Senate's Judiciary Committee will meet on Monday at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1.
On the agenda:
- a striker for SB1076 adding "Mixed Martial Arts" to the name of the Arizona State Boxing Commission, and adding rules for MMA to AZ's general laws.
- a striker for SB1081, relating to changes in the process to appoint a non-attorney member to a commission on trial court appointments.
- SB1168 (with a proposed amendment), preempting any local firearms laws.
- SB1292 (with a proposed amendment), eliminating the statute of limitations for civil actions stemming from sexual crimes perpetrated upon minors.
- SB1366 (with proposed amendments here and here), expanding the relocation assistance received by people dislocated by eminent domain activities.
- SB1393 (with proposed amendments here and here), regarding all sort of changes to election laws.
- SB1394, a nativist special from Russell Pearce.
- SB1444 (with a proposed amendment), relating to independent expenditures and campaign finance. AZBlueMeanie at Blog For Arizona has coverage here.
...House Judiciary will meet on Thursday at 9 a.m. in HHR4. Looks quiet thus far...
Later...
The Coming Week: Legislative Edition, chapter 2 - Money
As usual, all info gathered from the website of the legislature, except where noted, and subject to change without notice.
This post will cover the money committees - Senate Appropriations and Finance and House Approps and House Ways and Means.
...House Ways and Means will meet on Monday at 2 p.m. in HHR1.
One potentially bad bill that is up for consideration is HB2505. This proposal from Rep. Rick Murphy (R-LD9) would mandate a change in the standards that are used to review and evaluate income tax credits. He wants to add the language "SHALL INCLUDE, TO THE EXTENT PRACTICABLE, A REVIEW OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE CREDIT USING DYNAMIC ANALYSIS OR OTHER TECHNIQUES THAT ESTIMATE THE TAXPAYER BEHAVIORAL CHANGES OR MODIFICATIONS IN PATTERNS OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITY."
"Dynamic analysis"? "...Estimate..."?
Sounds like "smoke and mirrors" and "guesswork" calculated to generate a desired result.
Other bills of interest -
- A striker to HB2515 that would change the way that the sales tax (aka "transaction privilege tax") is assessed on contractors. It seems to lower the tax, but there is no fiscal note for this one (a common characteristic for Republican-sponsored tax bills - they don't want Arizonans to know how much the R gifts to Big Business are costing Arizona).
- A striker to HCR2057 that would allow the lege to appropriate "non-custodial federal monies." In short, if this becomes law, the lege could sweep things like community block grants and spend the money where it wants to.
- HCR2061, redefining property tax limits and cutting property taxes as a result. No fiscal note attached.
- HB2597, mandating that any new TPT or use tax exemption or deduction created by the lege have a specific repeal date as part of the legislation creating it. As this measure was proposed by a Democratic member, Tom Chabin (D-LD2), it comes with a fiscal note.
...House Appropriations will meet on Wednesday at 1 p.m. in HHR1. The agenda is short, but colorful.
"Colorful" being a euphemism for "pretty damn ugly and having very little to do with 'appropriations'."
On the agenda -
- A presentation on "Potential State Parks Operating Concession Agreements". Aka - privatizing the operation of state parks.
- a striker to HB2177, relating to "prison bed utilization; cost savings." The text of the striker isn't available online as yet.
- HB2226, relating to "school districts; personnel decisions." Sounds innocuous, until one reads the details.
No teacher contracts that allow for compensated days off for "professional organization activities" (union work, like rallying at the Capitol in support of public education) or for using tenure or seniority as part of job retention decisions.
- HB2385, changing the way that schools calculate "average daily membership," or the number of students enrolled in a school. This number affects school expenditure limits and the amount of financial support is receives. Not sure exactly what the impact of the proposed changes will be, but as this proposal is from a Republican, the expectation is that it won't be beneficial for students or teachers.
- HCR2038, a proposed amendment to the state constitution to reduce the Governor's power to use a line-item veto on their appropriations bills. Yes, they are still ticked off about last summer's budget debacle where they tried to force the Governor to sign some really bad budget bills by sending them to her at the very last possible moment and adjourning sine die before she could veto them.
In what has turned out to be the Accidental Governor's only bright moment, she did so anyway, forcing a special session to be called. That one and the ones that followed it haven't worked out so well, but let's give her credit in one of the few places that she has earned it.
Across the quad at the Senate...
,,,Senate Appropriations will meet on Tuesday at 1:30 p.m. in SHR109. As with House Approps, this agenda is a colorful one.
With the same caveat about the meaning of "colorful" in this context.
On the agenda -
- SB1017, Russell Pearce's bill to grant his friend, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, independence from the fiscal oversight of the county board of supervisors.
- SB1019, Pearce's bill to create a "joint legislative committee on evidence based practices in government programs." "Evidence based" practices are those that have a history to fall back on in evaluating their effectiveness; under Pearce's scheme, nothing innovative would be allowed when working to determine the course of state, county, and local government programs.
- a striker to SB1108 relating to "state shared revenues" that isn't posted online as yet. I'm not the only one who has noticed this and is worried about it - Pearce has not bothered to hide his fervent desire to devastate cities and towns by cutting the amount of revenue that the state shares with them.
- SB1391 (with an amendment offered by the author, Russell Pearce) to direct the state Department of Administration to privatize criminal background checks (for child care workers, health care providers, etc.) The bill is so specific in its requirements for a company to do that activity that it seems to limit the possible awarding of a contract to a few, or even one, specific companies.
- SB1403, Pearce's scheme to allow his friend, County Attorney Andrew Thomas, to serve subpoenas related to gathering evidence for enforcement of Pearce's anti-immigrant employer sanctions law by certified mail, and other changes, easing the conduct of Pearce's Inquistion.
...Senate Finance will meet Wednesday at 1:30 p.m. in SHR3. As with House Ways and Means, the agenda here is filled with tax-related proposals.
Most of the bills seek to lower taxes for specific groups, but the most egregious example of this sort of favoritism is Thayer Verschoor's SB1332. That one would completely exempt Arizona-based banks from the state's income tax.
*Banks*?!?!?
Yes, this "Thayer Verschoor" is the same "Thayer Verschoor" who is running for State Treasurer, and it looks like he may already be trolling for PAC campaign contributions.
This agenda (actually, all of them) is worthy of attention from people who are more expert in the area covered by it and who could pick up nuances that I've missed.
I'll cover the Judiciary committees as well as the rest later this afternoon...
This post will cover the money committees - Senate Appropriations and Finance and House Approps and House Ways and Means.
...House Ways and Means will meet on Monday at 2 p.m. in HHR1.
One potentially bad bill that is up for consideration is HB2505. This proposal from Rep. Rick Murphy (R-LD9) would mandate a change in the standards that are used to review and evaluate income tax credits. He wants to add the language "SHALL INCLUDE, TO THE EXTENT PRACTICABLE, A REVIEW OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE CREDIT USING DYNAMIC ANALYSIS OR OTHER TECHNIQUES THAT ESTIMATE THE TAXPAYER BEHAVIORAL CHANGES OR MODIFICATIONS IN PATTERNS OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITY."
"Dynamic analysis"? "...Estimate..."?
Sounds like "smoke and mirrors" and "guesswork" calculated to generate a desired result.
Other bills of interest -
- A striker to HB2515 that would change the way that the sales tax (aka "transaction privilege tax") is assessed on contractors. It seems to lower the tax, but there is no fiscal note for this one (a common characteristic for Republican-sponsored tax bills - they don't want Arizonans to know how much the R gifts to Big Business are costing Arizona).
- A striker to HCR2057 that would allow the lege to appropriate "non-custodial federal monies." In short, if this becomes law, the lege could sweep things like community block grants and spend the money where it wants to.
- HCR2061, redefining property tax limits and cutting property taxes as a result. No fiscal note attached.
- HB2597, mandating that any new TPT or use tax exemption or deduction created by the lege have a specific repeal date as part of the legislation creating it. As this measure was proposed by a Democratic member, Tom Chabin (D-LD2), it comes with a fiscal note.
...House Appropriations will meet on Wednesday at 1 p.m. in HHR1. The agenda is short, but colorful.
"Colorful" being a euphemism for "pretty damn ugly and having very little to do with 'appropriations'."
On the agenda -
- A presentation on "Potential State Parks Operating Concession Agreements". Aka - privatizing the operation of state parks.
- a striker to HB2177, relating to "prison bed utilization; cost savings." The text of the striker isn't available online as yet.
- HB2226, relating to "school districts; personnel decisions." Sounds innocuous, until one reads the details.
No teacher contracts that allow for compensated days off for "professional organization activities" (union work, like rallying at the Capitol in support of public education) or for using tenure or seniority as part of job retention decisions.
- HB2385, changing the way that schools calculate "average daily membership," or the number of students enrolled in a school. This number affects school expenditure limits and the amount of financial support is receives. Not sure exactly what the impact of the proposed changes will be, but as this proposal is from a Republican, the expectation is that it won't be beneficial for students or teachers.
- HCR2038, a proposed amendment to the state constitution to reduce the Governor's power to use a line-item veto on their appropriations bills. Yes, they are still ticked off about last summer's budget debacle where they tried to force the Governor to sign some really bad budget bills by sending them to her at the very last possible moment and adjourning sine die before she could veto them.
In what has turned out to be the Accidental Governor's only bright moment, she did so anyway, forcing a special session to be called. That one and the ones that followed it haven't worked out so well, but let's give her credit in one of the few places that she has earned it.
Across the quad at the Senate...
,,,Senate Appropriations will meet on Tuesday at 1:30 p.m. in SHR109. As with House Approps, this agenda is a colorful one.
With the same caveat about the meaning of "colorful" in this context.
On the agenda -
- SB1017, Russell Pearce's bill to grant his friend, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, independence from the fiscal oversight of the county board of supervisors.
- SB1019, Pearce's bill to create a "joint legislative committee on evidence based practices in government programs." "Evidence based" practices are those that have a history to fall back on in evaluating their effectiveness; under Pearce's scheme, nothing innovative would be allowed when working to determine the course of state, county, and local government programs.
- a striker to SB1108 relating to "state shared revenues" that isn't posted online as yet. I'm not the only one who has noticed this and is worried about it - Pearce has not bothered to hide his fervent desire to devastate cities and towns by cutting the amount of revenue that the state shares with them.
- SB1391 (with an amendment offered by the author, Russell Pearce) to direct the state Department of Administration to privatize criminal background checks (for child care workers, health care providers, etc.) The bill is so specific in its requirements for a company to do that activity that it seems to limit the possible awarding of a contract to a few, or even one, specific companies.
- SB1403, Pearce's scheme to allow his friend, County Attorney Andrew Thomas, to serve subpoenas related to gathering evidence for enforcement of Pearce's anti-immigrant employer sanctions law by certified mail, and other changes, easing the conduct of Pearce's Inquistion.
...Senate Finance will meet Wednesday at 1:30 p.m. in SHR3. As with House Ways and Means, the agenda here is filled with tax-related proposals.
Most of the bills seek to lower taxes for specific groups, but the most egregious example of this sort of favoritism is Thayer Verschoor's SB1332. That one would completely exempt Arizona-based banks from the state's income tax.
*Banks*?!?!?
Yes, this "Thayer Verschoor" is the same "Thayer Verschoor" who is running for State Treasurer, and it looks like he may already be trolling for PAC campaign contributions.
This agenda (actually, all of them) is worthy of attention from people who are more expert in the area covered by it and who could pick up nuances that I've missed.
I'll cover the Judiciary committees as well as the rest later this afternoon...
Saturday, February 20, 2010
The Coming Week: Legislative Edition, chapter 1 - Education
Because of the number of committees meeting this week and the length of their agendas, this week's schedule post will be broken down by pairing like committees with each other.
For instance, tonight's post will cover both chambers' education committees.
As usual, all info gathered from the lege's website, except where noted, and subject to change without notice...
...The House Education committee will meet on Monday at 2 p.m. in HHR3. It's easy to tell that we are getting into the nitty gritty of the session - legislators are seeking to give bills that have died for lack of consideration in the form of "strike everything" amendment that transform unrelated bills into something more to their liking. This phenomenon is in evidence on Monday's agenda.
There is a striker for HB2413. The original proposal has to do with something called "digital curriculum institute." Once the bill is amended, it will have to do with "teacher evaluations." Both the original bill and the proposed amendment are from Rich Crandall (R-LD19).
Not to fear fans of "digital curriculum institute." Crandall has proposed a striker to HB2720 to direct ASU and the state Department of Education to create an "institute" to evaluate online coursework for grades K-12. The original bill had to do with "teacher certification; reciprocity; postsecondary credits."
Another striker being offered is to HB2722. The original bill would have disallowed the practice of charter schools counting certain non-state resident students when determining how much state aid that they are entitled to. The striker expands the restriction to all schoo districts, not just charter schools.
There is also a striker being offered for HB2724 that doesn't change the subject of the bill at all. It looks to create a "state board of directors for community colleges."
Finally, a striker to HB2521 will be offered to require that school superintendents' contracts provide for a compensation package that is at least 20% performance-based.
One striker that *won't* be offered is for HB2556, relating to schools and shrinking the Arizona Department of Education. This is a fairly comprehensive bill with some rather interesting clauses in it that make the bill worthy of further analysis (David Safier, you listening? :) )
One clearly good bill on the House agenda is HB2760, Representative Rae Waters' bill to ensure that school districts pay attention to school roofs during their preventative maintenance procedures. An elementary school in her district experienced a roof collapse last year. The House Dems' press release on the bill is here.
One potentially ugly bill could be HCR2050. It's a proposal from a rogues' gallery of Republicans (Crandall, Huppenthal, Driggs, McClain, Court, Ash, etc.) that seeks to "expand" First Things First, an initiative-mandated early childhood development program.
One with protected funding that legislators have been eyeing for years.
This bill, a proposed referendum, would mandate an expansion to cover programs that aren't "early childhood", add new programs, and require FTF to spend a certain amount of money every year.
In short, it looks like the lege's attempt to have FTF cover programs that the lege wants to cut out of the state's General Fund without seeming like the societal Scrooges that they are.
...The Senate's Education Accountability and Reform Committee will meet on Wednesday at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1. As with the House agenda, this one is dominated by strike-everything amendments. Unlike the House, however, most of these strikers aren't posted online yet.
There will be a striker offered for SB1121, relating to impact aid, and one offered to SB1160 relating to English Language Learners. Additionally, a striker will be offered for SB1404, relating to "ADE; product evaluation."
While none of those strikers are yet available online, the one that will be offered for SCR1032 *is* available online. It's a Russell Pearce special. This one would mandate that schools spend a certain percentage of their budgets on "classroom instruction."
The bad "straight up" bill (no striker attached) on this agenda is SB1097, an anti-Mexican kid measure that would require school districts to gather and report information on "non-citizen" students. In a surprise development, this bill is from Russell Pearce.
Oh wait - that isn't really exactly a surprise, is it?
...Posts for the rest of the committee schedules will be coming tomorrow...
For instance, tonight's post will cover both chambers' education committees.
As usual, all info gathered from the lege's website, except where noted, and subject to change without notice...
...The House Education committee will meet on Monday at 2 p.m. in HHR3. It's easy to tell that we are getting into the nitty gritty of the session - legislators are seeking to give bills that have died for lack of consideration in the form of "strike everything" amendment that transform unrelated bills into something more to their liking. This phenomenon is in evidence on Monday's agenda.
There is a striker for HB2413. The original proposal has to do with something called "digital curriculum institute." Once the bill is amended, it will have to do with "teacher evaluations." Both the original bill and the proposed amendment are from Rich Crandall (R-LD19).
Not to fear fans of "digital curriculum institute." Crandall has proposed a striker to HB2720 to direct ASU and the state Department of Education to create an "institute" to evaluate online coursework for grades K-12. The original bill had to do with "teacher certification; reciprocity; postsecondary credits."
Another striker being offered is to HB2722. The original bill would have disallowed the practice of charter schools counting certain non-state resident students when determining how much state aid that they are entitled to. The striker expands the restriction to all schoo districts, not just charter schools.
There is also a striker being offered for HB2724 that doesn't change the subject of the bill at all. It looks to create a "state board of directors for community colleges."
Finally, a striker to HB2521 will be offered to require that school superintendents' contracts provide for a compensation package that is at least 20% performance-based.
One striker that *won't* be offered is for HB2556, relating to schools and shrinking the Arizona Department of Education. This is a fairly comprehensive bill with some rather interesting clauses in it that make the bill worthy of further analysis (David Safier, you listening? :) )
One clearly good bill on the House agenda is HB2760, Representative Rae Waters' bill to ensure that school districts pay attention to school roofs during their preventative maintenance procedures. An elementary school in her district experienced a roof collapse last year. The House Dems' press release on the bill is here.
One potentially ugly bill could be HCR2050. It's a proposal from a rogues' gallery of Republicans (Crandall, Huppenthal, Driggs, McClain, Court, Ash, etc.) that seeks to "expand" First Things First, an initiative-mandated early childhood development program.
One with protected funding that legislators have been eyeing for years.
This bill, a proposed referendum, would mandate an expansion to cover programs that aren't "early childhood", add new programs, and require FTF to spend a certain amount of money every year.
In short, it looks like the lege's attempt to have FTF cover programs that the lege wants to cut out of the state's General Fund without seeming like the societal Scrooges that they are.
...The Senate's Education Accountability and Reform Committee will meet on Wednesday at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1. As with the House agenda, this one is dominated by strike-everything amendments. Unlike the House, however, most of these strikers aren't posted online yet.
There will be a striker offered for SB1121, relating to impact aid, and one offered to SB1160 relating to English Language Learners. Additionally, a striker will be offered for SB1404, relating to "ADE; product evaluation."
While none of those strikers are yet available online, the one that will be offered for SCR1032 *is* available online. It's a Russell Pearce special. This one would mandate that schools spend a certain percentage of their budgets on "classroom instruction."
The bad "straight up" bill (no striker attached) on this agenda is SB1097, an anti-Mexican kid measure that would require school districts to gather and report information on "non-citizen" students. In a surprise development, this bill is from Russell Pearce.
Oh wait - that isn't really exactly a surprise, is it?
...Posts for the rest of the committee schedules will be coming tomorrow...
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Early ballot time
There are March elections all over the state, and early ballots for those elections are hitting mail boxes now.
Some are regularly scheduled municipal elections (such as Tempe's), school override-related special elections {such as the Kyrene school district's), or a mixed-bag special election (such as Scottsdale's).
Since I live in Scottsdale, that election ballot is the one that showed up in my mail box.
That one has six questions on it - five related that changes to the City's charter and one proposing to raise the City's bed tax (hotel tax) and apportion the funds raised to tourism promotion efforts.
The election pamphlet is here.
The charter amendment questions look to be relatively harmless ones. The ones to watch will be the ones that come up for consideration in August. Those will contain the language changes written by The Orange Coalition/Goldwater Institute/Arizona American Water that seek, under the guise of "protecting private property rights," to make it practically impossible for the City to acquire any private property without the highly-overcompensated consent of the current owners of said private property.
However, that's a post for another time, perhaps once the proposed language is finalized.
Back to the current election...
Proposition 100 would change the method of calculating what constitutes a majority for the purposes of determining the winner of a general election. In municipal elections, there is generally an early general election and a run-off election. The run-off is held if a candidate doesn't get a majority during the first election, which is frequently the case when there are more than two candidates for a single office. The proposed change would change the standard from the number of ballots cast to the number of legal votes cast. It sounds like a small change, but the first standard allows for the inclusion of spoiled ballots in determining the total necessary for a majority. This can create a problem when there is a close election between two candidates and the vote total difference between the two candidates is small and the number of spoiled ballots pushes the number of "ballots cast" high enough that neither candidate gains a "majority."
It actually happened in Scottsdale's mayoral election in 2008 between incumbent Mary Manross and eventual winner Jim Lane. The second election didn't make a difference in the outcome.
Proposition 101 would remove the need for a general (first) election for offices for which only two candidates are on the ballot.
Proposition 102 would change the names of the City's general (first) election and run-off (second) election to "primary" (first) and "general" (second).
Proposition 103 would change the notice requirements for an election to whatever the requirements are under state law, however those may change.
Proposition 104 would specify that any referendum/initiative questions that are approved by the voters but that conflict with the charter would not be enacted until the charter has been changed.
Proposition 200 would raise the City's bed tax and earmark the revenue for tourism-development activities.
My take: the first four propositions look like harmless housekeeping measures and I will have no problem voting "yes" on them. Prop 104 looks like it may be a way to inhibit the electorate's ability to override some of the changes that will be proposed for ballot consideration later in the year. I'm not sure how I will vote on that one.
However, the one that I am really not sure of is the bed tax. In a year when services and schools are being slashed all over the state, including in Scottsdale, and voters everywhere are being asked to approve levies to mitigate some of those cuts, this proposal is for a tax that directly benefits big businesses, not Arizona's residents.
Yes, this tax increase would be paid for by tourists, but I'm not sure that taxing outsiders because we have been shortsighted for decades is fair.
On the other hand, tourism is a big part of Scottsdale's economy.
I'm really not sure how I will vote on this one.
Later...
Some are regularly scheduled municipal elections (such as Tempe's), school override-related special elections {such as the Kyrene school district's), or a mixed-bag special election (such as Scottsdale's).
Since I live in Scottsdale, that election ballot is the one that showed up in my mail box.
That one has six questions on it - five related that changes to the City's charter and one proposing to raise the City's bed tax (hotel tax) and apportion the funds raised to tourism promotion efforts.
The election pamphlet is here.
The charter amendment questions look to be relatively harmless ones. The ones to watch will be the ones that come up for consideration in August. Those will contain the language changes written by The Orange Coalition/Goldwater Institute/Arizona American Water that seek, under the guise of "protecting private property rights," to make it practically impossible for the City to acquire any private property without the highly-overcompensated consent of the current owners of said private property.
However, that's a post for another time, perhaps once the proposed language is finalized.
Back to the current election...
Proposition 100 would change the method of calculating what constitutes a majority for the purposes of determining the winner of a general election. In municipal elections, there is generally an early general election and a run-off election. The run-off is held if a candidate doesn't get a majority during the first election, which is frequently the case when there are more than two candidates for a single office. The proposed change would change the standard from the number of ballots cast to the number of legal votes cast. It sounds like a small change, but the first standard allows for the inclusion of spoiled ballots in determining the total necessary for a majority. This can create a problem when there is a close election between two candidates and the vote total difference between the two candidates is small and the number of spoiled ballots pushes the number of "ballots cast" high enough that neither candidate gains a "majority."
It actually happened in Scottsdale's mayoral election in 2008 between incumbent Mary Manross and eventual winner Jim Lane. The second election didn't make a difference in the outcome.
Proposition 101 would remove the need for a general (first) election for offices for which only two candidates are on the ballot.
Proposition 102 would change the names of the City's general (first) election and run-off (second) election to "primary" (first) and "general" (second).
Proposition 103 would change the notice requirements for an election to whatever the requirements are under state law, however those may change.
Proposition 104 would specify that any referendum/initiative questions that are approved by the voters but that conflict with the charter would not be enacted until the charter has been changed.
Proposition 200 would raise the City's bed tax and earmark the revenue for tourism-development activities.
My take: the first four propositions look like harmless housekeeping measures and I will have no problem voting "yes" on them. Prop 104 looks like it may be a way to inhibit the electorate's ability to override some of the changes that will be proposed for ballot consideration later in the year. I'm not sure how I will vote on that one.
However, the one that I am really not sure of is the bed tax. In a year when services and schools are being slashed all over the state, including in Scottsdale, and voters everywhere are being asked to approve levies to mitigate some of those cuts, this proposal is for a tax that directly benefits big businesses, not Arizona's residents.
Yes, this tax increase would be paid for by tourists, but I'm not sure that taxing outsiders because we have been shortsighted for decades is fair.
On the other hand, tourism is a big part of Scottsdale's economy.
I'm really not sure how I will vote on this one.
Later...
Monday, February 15, 2010
Live Blogging Senate Judiciary
4:51 - SCR1040 up now. Judges retirement ages. I am out of here.
4:49 - Bill will be held this week and heard next week to allow for a compromise to be worked out. Cheuvront warns that he will "be very vocal" if the bill isn't heard next week. Aguirre seems OK with this.
4:48 - The Yuma CA is back.
4:42 - Cheuvront and Lasota are sniping at each other, though in a far more tactful way than the earlier exchanges with Paton.
4:39 - Cheuvront and Paton are sniping at each other.
4:37 - Cheuvront questions allowing organizations to plead "ignorance" in order to avoid liability for their actions/inactions.
4:36 - Paton hints at an amendment to address Lasota's concerns.
4:28 - Jack Lasota is speaking against the bill. He's focusing on institutional liability. Wants limitless statute of limitations against perpetrators, but thinks that employers should be protected.
4:27 - Pearce is talking about predators and the possible "unintended consequences" of this bill. He's looking for cover for voting "No", I think.
4:25 - I really wish that I had a camera with me - the sour looks on the faces of Huppenthal, Paton, Gray, and Pearce are priceless.
4:21 - Another survivor of childhood sexual abuse is speaking. She is a more polished speaker, possibly because as the head of an organization of survivors, she has done this more often.
4:20 - Mr. Chesley is most definitely not a polished public speaker, and his testimony is all the more powerful for that fact.
4:16 - An adult survivor of childhood sexual abuse, Al Chesley, a former NFL player, is now speaking.
4:13 - The Rs on the committee seem hesitant about this bill, but they are going to have a hard time finding political cover for voting "no." Paton seems to be zeroing in on organizational liability.
4:07 - Paton is concerned about the bill's liability issues for organizations such as churches and schools. The bill would end the statute of limitations for civil actions, so if such an organization had done something wrong, they could be sued.
4:04 - A national victim's rights advocate is speaking in support of the bill.
4:03 - Paton talks about time, and announces that the Senate will have an additional week to consider Senate bills. Some of the later bills on the agenda will be put on the agenda for the next meeting.
3:58 - Pinal County Sheriff is speaking in support of the bill.
3:51 - The Yuma County Attorney is speaking in favor of the bill.
3:46 - SB1292, elimating the statute of limitations on civil actions regarding sexual offenses committed against minors. Amanda Aguirre's bill.
3:39 - Voting. Burton Cahill passes for now. Cheuvront thinks merit selection should be statewide, votes No. Gray wants to conduct a social experiment with having some counties with larger populations go with direct election, votes Yes. Miranda votes No. Pearce votes Yes. Huppenthal wants to end retention completely, votes Yes. Burton Cahill votes No. Paton talks about how AZ couldn't become a state because we allowed the recall of judges. That was eliminated for the purposes of statehood, but was added back into AZ law as soon as it became a state. Passes 4 - 3.
3:33 - Paton and the others bemoan the fact that most voters don't know anything about judges who are subject to retention by the voters, and think that Senate confirmation/direct election would make the judges better known. If I had signed in to speak, I would point out that society's judges are like baseball's umpires - the only ones who get a lot of public notice are the ones who screw up badly. Most Maricopa County judges, as well as those statewide, haven't done so.
3:29 - Personal note: The AC in this room (SHR1) works really well. That's a tactful way of saying that I'm freezing my a__ off. :)
3:27 - A Pinal judge argues against the bill because judges aren't supposed to be political.
3:22 - SCR1049, adjusting population limits for kicking in a merit selection/retention process for judges.
3:21 - SCR1049 up next out of deference to the Chief Justice, who is here to speak on it.
3:12 - Voting. Burton-Cahill - No. Cheuvront - thinks that an organization that has done such a poor job of running the state shouldn't have a place in running the judiciary, votes No. Chuck Gray decries the "lack of a free market" for judges and wants all judges should be elected, votes Yes. Miranda - thinks that current system works, votes No. Pearce - wants voters to pick judges based on "moral character", not professional qualifications, votes Yes. Huppenthal - thinks that system is fair, but wants elected judges, votes Yes to continue debate. Paton - thinks system is partisan and he wants in on some of that, votes Yes. Passes 4 - 3.
3:10 - Jack Harper considers this a battle against liberals and anyone with a "far left ideology", including the AZ State Bar.
3:09 - Reading the list of folks signed in opposing or supporting the bill. All but two oppose.
3:04 - He points out that AZ's judiciary is known as one of the fairest and most even-handed in the country and cites the example of a Republican candidate for state senate a few years ago who ran into some petition issues and who was sued by the AZDems to get him off of the ballot. The case was heard by three Democratic justices.
The R won his case.
3:00 - The lobbyist for the AZ Judges Association is now weighing in. They're opposed. Not exactly a shock, that. He points out that few if any folks have shown up in support of the measure.
2:56 - Paton is a partisan hack. He considers the fact that Jane Hull once appointed a Democrat to the AZ Supreme Court as "going against her own party." Apparently Paton considers partisan affiliation a more important qualification in judges than things like fairness or legal knowledge.
2:55 - Paton is trying to go into the partisan affiliations of the justices on the Supreme Court.
2:52 - Pelander points out that under Harper's proposal that Pima County judges would be approved by Maricopa politicians.
2:51 - Justice Pelander of the Supreme Court is defending the process he recently went through - he's the newest Justice on the AZ Supreme Court.
2:48 - Public Podium switched out. Mic is now working. YES! :)
2:47 - Paton says the system is broken and needs to be addressed.
2:46 - Berch stands up for the judiciary.
2:43 - Pearce doesn't think that "we the people" have enough influence over judge selection. He's making Paton's pro-Republicanization of the judiciary argument, just using different words.
2:41 - Paton wants to know why there aren't more Republicans on the Bar Association's nominating commission for judges. Berch doesn't know who is currently on the nominating commission.
2:38 - Paton questions Berch about some long unfilled vacancies. Berch points out that it is a political problem. The lobbyist behind me doesn't understand the concept of turning pages quietly, so I can't hear most of what is being said...oops. He caught the dirty looks he was getting and has stepped away. :)
2:34 - The Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court, Rebecca Berch, is speaking to the proposal's lack of wisdom. The public mic isn't working. Ugh.
2:33 - Hearing on SCR1002, Jack Harper's proposal to politicize the state's judiciary by making the appointment of judges subject to Senate confirmation.
2:28 - Paton calls the meeting to order almost an hour late due to a long (but tedious) floor session.
4:49 - Bill will be held this week and heard next week to allow for a compromise to be worked out. Cheuvront warns that he will "be very vocal" if the bill isn't heard next week. Aguirre seems OK with this.
4:48 - The Yuma CA is back.
4:42 - Cheuvront and Lasota are sniping at each other, though in a far more tactful way than the earlier exchanges with Paton.
4:39 - Cheuvront and Paton are sniping at each other.
4:37 - Cheuvront questions allowing organizations to plead "ignorance" in order to avoid liability for their actions/inactions.
4:36 - Paton hints at an amendment to address Lasota's concerns.
4:28 - Jack Lasota is speaking against the bill. He's focusing on institutional liability. Wants limitless statute of limitations against perpetrators, but thinks that employers should be protected.
4:27 - Pearce is talking about predators and the possible "unintended consequences" of this bill. He's looking for cover for voting "No", I think.
4:25 - I really wish that I had a camera with me - the sour looks on the faces of Huppenthal, Paton, Gray, and Pearce are priceless.
4:21 - Another survivor of childhood sexual abuse is speaking. She is a more polished speaker, possibly because as the head of an organization of survivors, she has done this more often.
4:20 - Mr. Chesley is most definitely not a polished public speaker, and his testimony is all the more powerful for that fact.
4:16 - An adult survivor of childhood sexual abuse, Al Chesley, a former NFL player, is now speaking.
4:13 - The Rs on the committee seem hesitant about this bill, but they are going to have a hard time finding political cover for voting "no." Paton seems to be zeroing in on organizational liability.
4:07 - Paton is concerned about the bill's liability issues for organizations such as churches and schools. The bill would end the statute of limitations for civil actions, so if such an organization had done something wrong, they could be sued.
4:04 - A national victim's rights advocate is speaking in support of the bill.
4:03 - Paton talks about time, and announces that the Senate will have an additional week to consider Senate bills. Some of the later bills on the agenda will be put on the agenda for the next meeting.
3:58 - Pinal County Sheriff is speaking in support of the bill.
3:51 - The Yuma County Attorney is speaking in favor of the bill.
3:46 - SB1292, elimating the statute of limitations on civil actions regarding sexual offenses committed against minors. Amanda Aguirre's bill.
3:39 - Voting. Burton Cahill passes for now. Cheuvront thinks merit selection should be statewide, votes No. Gray wants to conduct a social experiment with having some counties with larger populations go with direct election, votes Yes. Miranda votes No. Pearce votes Yes. Huppenthal wants to end retention completely, votes Yes. Burton Cahill votes No. Paton talks about how AZ couldn't become a state because we allowed the recall of judges. That was eliminated for the purposes of statehood, but was added back into AZ law as soon as it became a state. Passes 4 - 3.
3:33 - Paton and the others bemoan the fact that most voters don't know anything about judges who are subject to retention by the voters, and think that Senate confirmation/direct election would make the judges better known. If I had signed in to speak, I would point out that society's judges are like baseball's umpires - the only ones who get a lot of public notice are the ones who screw up badly. Most Maricopa County judges, as well as those statewide, haven't done so.
3:29 - Personal note: The AC in this room (SHR1) works really well. That's a tactful way of saying that I'm freezing my a__ off. :)
3:27 - A Pinal judge argues against the bill because judges aren't supposed to be political.
3:22 - SCR1049, adjusting population limits for kicking in a merit selection/retention process for judges.
3:21 - SCR1049 up next out of deference to the Chief Justice, who is here to speak on it.
3:12 - Voting. Burton-Cahill - No. Cheuvront - thinks that an organization that has done such a poor job of running the state shouldn't have a place in running the judiciary, votes No. Chuck Gray decries the "lack of a free market" for judges and wants all judges should be elected, votes Yes. Miranda - thinks that current system works, votes No. Pearce - wants voters to pick judges based on "moral character", not professional qualifications, votes Yes. Huppenthal - thinks that system is fair, but wants elected judges, votes Yes to continue debate. Paton - thinks system is partisan and he wants in on some of that, votes Yes. Passes 4 - 3.
3:10 - Jack Harper considers this a battle against liberals and anyone with a "far left ideology", including the AZ State Bar.
3:09 - Reading the list of folks signed in opposing or supporting the bill. All but two oppose.
3:04 - He points out that AZ's judiciary is known as one of the fairest and most even-handed in the country and cites the example of a Republican candidate for state senate a few years ago who ran into some petition issues and who was sued by the AZDems to get him off of the ballot. The case was heard by three Democratic justices.
The R won his case.
3:00 - The lobbyist for the AZ Judges Association is now weighing in. They're opposed. Not exactly a shock, that. He points out that few if any folks have shown up in support of the measure.
2:56 - Paton is a partisan hack. He considers the fact that Jane Hull once appointed a Democrat to the AZ Supreme Court as "going against her own party." Apparently Paton considers partisan affiliation a more important qualification in judges than things like fairness or legal knowledge.
2:55 - Paton is trying to go into the partisan affiliations of the justices on the Supreme Court.
2:52 - Pelander points out that under Harper's proposal that Pima County judges would be approved by Maricopa politicians.
2:51 - Justice Pelander of the Supreme Court is defending the process he recently went through - he's the newest Justice on the AZ Supreme Court.
2:48 - Public Podium switched out. Mic is now working. YES! :)
2:47 - Paton says the system is broken and needs to be addressed.
2:46 - Berch stands up for the judiciary.
2:43 - Pearce doesn't think that "we the people" have enough influence over judge selection. He's making Paton's pro-Republicanization of the judiciary argument, just using different words.
2:41 - Paton wants to know why there aren't more Republicans on the Bar Association's nominating commission for judges. Berch doesn't know who is currently on the nominating commission.
2:38 - Paton questions Berch about some long unfilled vacancies. Berch points out that it is a political problem. The lobbyist behind me doesn't understand the concept of turning pages quietly, so I can't hear most of what is being said...oops. He caught the dirty looks he was getting and has stepped away. :)
2:34 - The Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court, Rebecca Berch, is speaking to the proposal's lack of wisdom. The public mic isn't working. Ugh.
2:33 - Hearing on SCR1002, Jack Harper's proposal to politicize the state's judiciary by making the appointment of judges subject to Senate confirmation.
2:28 - Paton calls the meeting to order almost an hour late due to a long (but tedious) floor session.
OK kids. Can you say "stalking horse"?
The headline of the article says it all...
From AZCentral.com -
The timing of today's announcements by Simcox (withdrawing from the race and immediately endorsing Hayworth) lead me to believe that Simcox was a knowing participant in Hayworth's use of his candidacy to gauge the viability of a run at McCain from the far right.
BTW - Am I the only one who looks at the list of people at Hayworth's announcement, those listed as "allies" (Arpaio, Gray, Gould, and Simcox) and wondered "With friends like these...?"
Later...
From AZCentral.com -
Hayworth announces against McCain, Simcox drops outThe definition of "stalking horse," from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary -
Former Arizona Congressman J.D. Hayworth on Monday officially announced his much-talked-about Republican primary challenge to incumbent GOP Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.
Hayworth, a well-known critic of illegal immigration, was joined at the hourlong event in northeast Phoenix by political allies such as Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, State Sen. Majority Leader Chuck Gray, R-Mesa, and state Sen. Ron Gould, R-Lake Havasu City.
A surprise came with the endorsement from Chris Simcox, the founder of the border-watch group Minuteman Civil Defense Corps who on Monday withdrew from the Senate race and threw his support to Hayworth.
...a candidate put forward to divide the opposition or to conceal someone's real candidacyNow, not being someone who travels in nativist circles, I can't state with any certainty that Mr. Simcox was a willing or even knowing part of the "stalking horse" part of his campaign. However, that wouldn't have an impact on the Hayworth camp's use of Simcox' candidacy as a stalking horse.
The timing of today's announcements by Simcox (withdrawing from the race and immediately endorsing Hayworth) lead me to believe that Simcox was a knowing participant in Hayworth's use of his candidacy to gauge the viability of a run at McCain from the far right.
BTW - Am I the only one who looks at the list of people at Hayworth's announcement, those listed as "allies" (Arpaio, Gray, Gould, and Simcox) and wondered "With friends like these...?"
Later...
Quick update: the lege is in session today
Today is President's Day, a legal holiday. Most government operations and agencies are closed due to the holiday (no school, mail delivery, etc.), but a phone call to the lege's info desk has confirmed that the chambers of the legislature will be conducting business today.
Anybody who planned to visit the lege today can do so, but they should be aware that the rest of the Capitol is closed.
Later...
Anybody who planned to visit the lege today can do so, but they should be aware that the rest of the Capitol is closed.
Later...
Sunday, February 14, 2010
The Coming Week: Legislative Edition
As usual, all info gathered from the website of the Arizona legislature and subject to change without notice.
Note: I will list the agendas posted for Monday, February 15, but if a reader is interested in attending a hearing in person, call ahead. Monday is a legal holiday and most government offices, including schools and the post office, are closed. Given that, I am not absolutely sure that the lege will be in session Monday.
Anyway, on to the meat of the post...
Abortion reporting, divorce waiting periods, gun and fireworks laws, and assertions of Arizona's supremacy over the federal government highlight the week that will be in the Arizona legislature.
On the Senate side of the quad -
On Monday -
- The Rules Committee is scheduled to meet upon adjournment of the Senate floor session in Caucus Room 1.
- Natural Resources, Infrastructure, and Public Debt will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR109. Highlights of the agenda (and there *are* highlights, surprisingly enough):
A striker to SB1223 involving rights-of-way over public lands (I do *not* understand the nuances of this one, but since it is from Sylvia Allen, it probably isn't good public policy);
SB1334 (banning texting while driving...YES!);
SCR1046 (an amendment to AZ's constitution asserting Arizona's absolute dominion over any "non-navigable" waterways within the borders of the state. Something that various tribal governments and the U.S. government might take issue with...);
SCR1050 (asserting that only the Arizona Legislature can regulate greenhouse gases and that any attempt to enforce any federal laws in this regard will be unlawful. The want to call this the "Freedom to Breathe Act" but I call it the "We Want To Secede Over Environmental Laws And Regulations Act.");
- Judiciary will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1. Highlights:
A striker to SB1054 and a striker to SCR1012 that together would compel the Governor to journey to the lege every two weeks to answer questions from legislators (call it the "Jonathan Paton Wishes He Was Running For Parliament Instead Of Congress Act");
SB1168 (legislatively pre-empting any regulation of firearms by municipalities, counties, or other political subdivisions);
SB1363 and SB1366 (relating to eminent domain, in a "making it both more difficult and expensive to use" sort of way);
SCR1043 (defunding Clean Elections by moving its monies into the "classroom site fund.").
On Tuesday -
- Commerce and Economic Development will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1. Agenda highlights:
SB1126 (telling the feds that they can't regulate any nuclear fuel created and used exclusively in Arizona);
SB1242 (restricting union and labor protest activities).
- Appropriations will meet at 1:30 in SHR109. Highlights:
A striker to SB1104 (imposing a formula-based hard cap on state spending);
SB1213 (posting the Ten Commandments in the Old State Capitol Building);
SB1311 (imposing a zero-based budgeting process for state agencies and forcing those agencies to rank programs by priority, giving the lege political cover for their cuts ["Hey, they said that health care outreach to the homeless was less important than neonatal care for moms-to-be on AHCCCS!"]);
SB1391 (creating specific criteria for what kind of company can be hired to conduct employee/provider criminal records checks for state agencies...criteria that is so specific as to lead a cynical person to believe that the author, Russell Pearce, has one company in mind for the contract);
SCM1005 (a postcard to Congress demanding that they reimburse Arizona for costs related to illegal immigration);
SCR1032 (imposing a formula for K-12 public school spending and various reporting requirements).
On Wednesday -
- Public Safety and Human Services will meet at 9 a.m. in SHR3. Highlights:
SB1199 (the Senate version of the Center For Arizona Policy's bill to lengthen the waiting period for divorces. The bill doesn't actually do anything to encourage healthy marriages, only longer bad marriages);
SB1304 (the Senate version of the Center For Arizona Policy's bill to limit the availability of legal abortion services by imposing overly-onerous paperwork requirements on providers);
SB1305 (barring the use of public money to pay for the premiums of insurance plans that cover abortion services);
SB1306 (discouraging the donation of human eggs for in vitro fertilization and other purposes. The authors say that the intent of the bill is to "protect" human egg donors, but the effect will be as stated in the first sentence);
SB1307 (imposing all sort of restrictions on the treatment and handling of human embryos. I think that someone at the Center for Arizona Policy recently read the Island of Doctor Moreau. Really. This one is more bizarre than the usual output of the Arizona Chapter of the Flat Earth Society);
SB1309 (the "parents bill of rights" bill. Should be called "the lazy parents who don't want to put in the effort to pay attention to what is going on with their kids' schools" bill. It imposes all sorts of unfunded mandates and restrictions on schools.);
SB1330 (overriding local regulation of a list of permissable "consumer fireworks");
SCR1044 (a proposed amendment to the AZ constitution banning human cloning in the state)
- Healthcare and Medical Liability Reform will meet at 9 a.m. in SHR1. Highlight:
SCR1045 (a proposed amendment to the AZ constitution imposing limits on jury awards in health care-related lawsuits)
Note: I will list the agendas posted for Monday, February 15, but if a reader is interested in attending a hearing in person, call ahead. Monday is a legal holiday and most government offices, including schools and the post office, are closed. Given that, I am not absolutely sure that the lege will be in session Monday.
Anyway, on to the meat of the post...
Abortion reporting, divorce waiting periods, gun and fireworks laws, and assertions of Arizona's supremacy over the federal government highlight the week that will be in the Arizona legislature.
On the Senate side of the quad -
On Monday -
- The Rules Committee is scheduled to meet upon adjournment of the Senate floor session in Caucus Room 1.
- Natural Resources, Infrastructure, and Public Debt will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR109. Highlights of the agenda (and there *are* highlights, surprisingly enough):
A striker to SB1223 involving rights-of-way over public lands (I do *not* understand the nuances of this one, but since it is from Sylvia Allen, it probably isn't good public policy);
SB1334 (banning texting while driving...YES!);
SCR1046 (an amendment to AZ's constitution asserting Arizona's absolute dominion over any "non-navigable" waterways within the borders of the state. Something that various tribal governments and the U.S. government might take issue with...);
SCR1050 (asserting that only the Arizona Legislature can regulate greenhouse gases and that any attempt to enforce any federal laws in this regard will be unlawful. The want to call this the "Freedom to Breathe Act" but I call it the "We Want To Secede Over Environmental Laws And Regulations Act.");
- Judiciary will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1. Highlights:
A striker to SB1054 and a striker to SCR1012 that together would compel the Governor to journey to the lege every two weeks to answer questions from legislators (call it the "Jonathan Paton Wishes He Was Running For Parliament Instead Of Congress Act");
SB1168 (legislatively pre-empting any regulation of firearms by municipalities, counties, or other political subdivisions);
SB1363 and SB1366 (relating to eminent domain, in a "making it both more difficult and expensive to use" sort of way);
SCR1043 (defunding Clean Elections by moving its monies into the "classroom site fund.").
On Tuesday -
- Commerce and Economic Development will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1. Agenda highlights:
SB1126 (telling the feds that they can't regulate any nuclear fuel created and used exclusively in Arizona);
SB1242 (restricting union and labor protest activities).
- Appropriations will meet at 1:30 in SHR109. Highlights:
A striker to SB1104 (imposing a formula-based hard cap on state spending);
SB1213 (posting the Ten Commandments in the Old State Capitol Building);
SB1311 (imposing a zero-based budgeting process for state agencies and forcing those agencies to rank programs by priority, giving the lege political cover for their cuts ["Hey, they said that health care outreach to the homeless was less important than neonatal care for moms-to-be on AHCCCS!"]);
SB1391 (creating specific criteria for what kind of company can be hired to conduct employee/provider criminal records checks for state agencies...criteria that is so specific as to lead a cynical person to believe that the author, Russell Pearce, has one company in mind for the contract);
SCM1005 (a postcard to Congress demanding that they reimburse Arizona for costs related to illegal immigration);
SCR1032 (imposing a formula for K-12 public school spending and various reporting requirements).
On Wednesday -
- Public Safety and Human Services will meet at 9 a.m. in SHR3. Highlights:
SB1199 (the Senate version of the Center For Arizona Policy's bill to lengthen the waiting period for divorces. The bill doesn't actually do anything to encourage healthy marriages, only longer bad marriages);
SB1304 (the Senate version of the Center For Arizona Policy's bill to limit the availability of legal abortion services by imposing overly-onerous paperwork requirements on providers);
SB1305 (barring the use of public money to pay for the premiums of insurance plans that cover abortion services);
SB1306 (discouraging the donation of human eggs for in vitro fertilization and other purposes. The authors say that the intent of the bill is to "protect" human egg donors, but the effect will be as stated in the first sentence);
SB1307 (imposing all sort of restrictions on the treatment and handling of human embryos. I think that someone at the Center for Arizona Policy recently read the Island of Doctor Moreau. Really. This one is more bizarre than the usual output of the Arizona Chapter of the Flat Earth Society);
SB1309 (the "parents bill of rights" bill. Should be called "the lazy parents who don't want to put in the effort to pay attention to what is going on with their kids' schools" bill. It imposes all sorts of unfunded mandates and restrictions on schools.);
SB1330 (overriding local regulation of a list of permissable "consumer fireworks");
SCR1044 (a proposed amendment to the AZ constitution banning human cloning in the state)
- Healthcare and Medical Liability Reform will meet at 9 a.m. in SHR1. Highlight:
SCR1045 (a proposed amendment to the AZ constitution imposing limits on jury awards in health care-related lawsuits)
- Finance will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR3. Highlights:
- There are a number of tax and tax deduction-related bills on the agenda, and I'm not going to try to translate the legalese. Suffice it to say that most look like they are designed to lower taxes rates for businesses.
- SCM1003 (a postcard to Congress asking them to send more money from the federal fuel tax to Arizona);
- SCR1008 (ending the state's income tax);
- SB1222 (exempting medical marijuana from the state's sales tax, conditional on the voters passage of the medical marijuana initiative in November);
- SB1372 (broadening the state's sales tax base; proposed by a Democrat [Jorge Luis Garcia], this is a good idea that doesn't have a snowball's chance of passing the full Senate).
Education Accountability and Reform will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1. Highlights:
- SB1281 (requiring public schools to allow charter school students to participate in public school athletic activities);
- There are also a number of bills that are technical in nature. Not unimportant, but someone else with more grounding in the nuances of education management should do the analysis.
Government will meet on Thursday at 10:30 a.m. in SHR1. Looks quiet so far, though SB1357 (easing the passage of zoning changes, allowing them to go through over the objections of neighboring property owners) looks potentially worrisome.
Over on the House side of the quad...
On Monday...
Rules is scheduled to meet at 1 p.m. in HHR4.
Ways and Means will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR1. Highlights:
- HB2496 (changing the contribution date for STO contributions to allow tax credits in the previous tax year for donationsmade in the current calendar year; JLBC fiscal note here);
- HB2660 (tripling the allowable tax credit for STO contributions; fiscal note here);
- HCR2057 (phasing out the business personal property tax);
- a number of other tax-related bills, mostly reducing taxes on business.
Natural Resources and Military Affairs will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR4. Quiet so far, but only because they've removed all but two items from the agenda.
Education will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR3. Highlights:
- A striker to HB2040 (reducing the amount of info that community colleges must report)
- HB2281 (barring the teaching of classes that "promote the overthrow of the United States government" or "promote toward a race or class of people." I'm not sure, but in light of recent and not-so-recent Supreme Court rulings, this could actually bar any class that discusses the misdeeds of various corporations in the U.S.);
- HB2283 (the same language regarding school expenditures as SCR1032 above).
Banking and Insurance will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR5. Quiet thus far.
On Tuesday...
Government will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR4. Highlight:
- HB2276 (making the names of people who are enrolled in AHCCCS "public information" and giving legislators free access to a database of the names).
Environment will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR5. Quiet so far.
On Wednesday...
Commerce will meet at 8 a.m. in HHR5. Highlights of the long agenda:
- HB2474 (superseding local regulation of a list of permissable consumer fireworks; same as above);
- HB2639 and HCR2043 (reducing the minimum wage for workers who are 21 years old or younger to 75% of the current minumum wage).
Military Affairs and Public Safety will meet in HHR3 at 2 p.m. or upon adjournment of the House floor session. Highlight:
- HB2543 (overriding any local ordinances regarding firearms);
- HB2683 (allowing corrections officers to moonlight in other prisons [including private?] or as adjunct faculty).
Health and Human Services will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR4. Highlights:
- HB2651 and HB2652 (relating to human egg providers and human embryos, respectively. The same as SB1306 and SB1307 above.)
Appropriations will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR1. Highlights:
- HB2500 (declaring that the lege can and will sweep and reappropriate "non-custodial" federal monies sent to AZ such as community block grants);
- HB2538 (demanding that the federal government certify any federal mandates are constitutional before the lege will enact any laws relating to such federal mandates).
On Thursday...
Water and Energy will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR5. Quiet thus far.
Transportation and Infrastructure will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR3. Quiet thus far.
Judiciary will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR4. Highlight:
- HB2490 (exempting religious entities from having to register a political committee if they don't spend a "substantial" amount of time or assets on influencing federal, state, or local legislation, initiatives, etc.)
Yes, this was a long post. Expect another 5 - 6 weeks of agendas like these before things start simmering down a little, toward the end of March.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Busy day 1: House Rs would rather give corporations huge tax cuts than balance the state's budget
Where to start, where to start...
Today has been a rather colorful day in Arizona politics, creating a rather "target rich" environment for snarky bloggers. Let's start with the fundamentals...
From AZCentral.com -
Senate President Bob Burns has stated that he won't take up the tax cut bill before the lege passes a balance budget and has at least started the sine die process** for the sixth special session in the Senate, but if the House doesn't sine die the sixth special session by Tuesday, the bill approving the sales tax hike referral won't become effective until after the deadline for a special election in May. In other words, they get their sh!t together by Tuesday or the special election is off.
I'm not sure if that is a bad thing - I won't be voting for the sales tax increase if it is only going to be used to backfill the Rs corporate tax cuts.
*The House's passage of the amended bill was by the bare minimum of 31 votes, and that is after Rep. Lucy Mason (R-LD1) changed her vote to yes after giving a long speech on how bad the overall bill was. Of course, she changed her vote after receiving a note from one of her colleagues (Steve Montenegro (R-LD12)?.) Not sure what was in the note, but she changed her vote straight away.
**The Senate tried to adjourn sine die, but under the procedures of the lege, both chambers must adjourn at the same time, and when the Senate sent a committee over to the House to announce and coordinate the adjournment, no one was home to receive them. As such, the special session is continuing.
Later...
Today has been a rather colorful day in Arizona politics, creating a rather "target rich" environment for snarky bloggers. Let's start with the fundamentals...
From AZCentral.com -
The fate of a planned May 18 sales-tax election as well as hopes of balancing this year's state budget are in question after the House of Representatives Thursday derailed plans to close out a special session addressing the deficit.The House accepted, on a mostly party line vote*, an amendment from Frank Antenori to the Special Session's SB1002. The amendment was a conditional enactment clause that would hold the provisions of SB1002 in abeyance until regular session HB2250 is enacted. HB2250 is a series of corporate tax cuts including a property tax cut that would be backfilled by an increase to residential property tax rates and an income tax cut that has no guarantee that the corporate savings will be used to hire new employees.
The House linked approval of a bill that would cut taxes and provide other incentives for job creation to a budget-balancing bill that delays payments to the state's schools. That put it at odds with the Senate, where the jobs bill has not been in play and where Senate President Bob Burns said he won't consider the legislation until after lawmakers pass a budget.
Senate President Bob Burns has stated that he won't take up the tax cut bill before the lege passes a balance budget and has at least started the sine die process** for the sixth special session in the Senate, but if the House doesn't sine die the sixth special session by Tuesday, the bill approving the sales tax hike referral won't become effective until after the deadline for a special election in May. In other words, they get their sh!t together by Tuesday or the special election is off.
I'm not sure if that is a bad thing - I won't be voting for the sales tax increase if it is only going to be used to backfill the Rs corporate tax cuts.
*The House's passage of the amended bill was by the bare minimum of 31 votes, and that is after Rep. Lucy Mason (R-LD1) changed her vote to yes after giving a long speech on how bad the overall bill was. Of course, she changed her vote after receiving a note from one of her colleagues (Steve Montenegro (R-LD12)?.) Not sure what was in the note, but she changed her vote straight away.
**The Senate tried to adjourn sine die, but under the procedures of the lege, both chambers must adjourn at the same time, and when the Senate sent a committee over to the House to announce and coordinate the adjournment, no one was home to receive them. As such, the special session is continuing.
Later...
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
A picture that is worth more than a 1000 words...
Normally, I don't post press releases from the DCCC, but this one has the perfect response when one encounters someone (like a teabagger or other Republican) who is screaming that President Obama and the Democrats in Congress haven't done anything to address America's deep economic crisis.
From Stakeholder, the DCCC's blog -
Then we come to the bar chart that puts the numbers into context, a month-by-month visual comparison of the last 26 months' job loss numbers - the last 14 months of the Bush administration and the first 12 of the Obama administration.
From Stakeholder, the DCCC's blog -
Today's Department of Labor jobs report showed that our economy shed 20,000 jobs last month -- down 97 percent from the 779,000 January job losses a year ago. There is still much work ahead, but today's numbers make clear that President Obama's economic policies have brought us back from the brink of disaster and are putting America on the road to economic recovery.Of course, that paragraph could just be "fun with statistics", cherry-picking a number that can be spun in a particular way.
Then we come to the bar chart that puts the numbers into context, a month-by-month visual comparison of the last 26 months' job loss numbers - the last 14 months of the Bush administration and the first 12 of the Obama administration.
Congress called on account of weather
From an announcement from Steny Hoyer, House Majority Leader -
Congress will be spending next week in their districts.
Personally, I think that they are just wimping out in the face of a little light snow. :)
House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (MD) released the following statement today on the schedule for the U.S. House of Representatives:
“As a result of the inclement weather affecting Members’ ability to travel to Washington, DC this week, there will be no votes in the House for the remainder of the week. The change this week means that we will add two days to the schedule as we look to take action on a jobs bill and other critical measures. Therefore, the House will reconvene on Monday, February 22, one day earlier than previously scheduled. The House will now also be in session on Friday, February 26th.”
Congress will be spending next week in their districts.
Personally, I think that they are just wimping out in the face of a little light snow. :)
GOP: "Bipartisanship"? We don' need no stinkin' bipartisanship!
Apparently, the GOPers in DC, much like the GOPers at the AZ Capitol, consider "bipartisanship" to be short for "Democrats doing exactly what we want."
From The Hill, last September 9th -
Not so much -
From the Washington Post, today (February 9, 2010) -
From The Hill, last September 9th -
The ball is in President Obama's court to reach out to Republicans if he wants a bipartisan bill on healthcare reform, House GOP Leader John Boehner (Ohio) said Monday morning.From the LA Times, February 6, 2010 -
Boehner told reporters that the president has not invited House GOP leaders to the White House for meetings on healthcare reform since the end of April.
Reporting from Washington - In a high-stakes bid to revive his healthcare overhaul, President Obama announced during a pre-Super Bowl television interview that he would convene a bipartisan summit in which Republicans and Democrats would try to forge a compromise while a national TV audience watched.So, the GOPers are getting exactly what they asked for, so the legislative logjam in DC is loosening, right?
Not so much -
From the Washington Post, today (February 9, 2010) -
Leading House Republicans raised the prospect Monday night that they might refuse to participate in President Obama's proposed health care summit if the White House chooses not to scrap the existing reform bills and start over.No word if the "prospect raising" was accompanied by the GOPers stamping their feet and shouting "waahhhh! I can't hear you!" with their fingers in their ears...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)