While any candidate who jumps into for the US Senate will be sure to start raising money, some potential candidates already have a head start. They already have federal campaign committees formed, and even if the committees are for some other office, the cash can be transferred to a Senate run.
The most recent "cash on hand" reported for the federal campaign committees of selected possible candidates -
Republicans -
JD Hayworth - $148,224.47
Jeff Flake - $627,851.61
John Shadegg - $154.99
David Schweikert - $16,308.33
Ruth McClung - $107,649.87 (included because she has so much cash on hand)
Jonathan Paton - $12,389.26
Ben Quayle - $7607.04
Democrats -
Ed Pastor - $1,391,936.29
Gabrielle Giffords - $285,501.24
Raul Grijalva - $30,621.77
Ann Kirkpatrick - $13,896.86
Just for giggles -
Joe Arpaio - $2,829,160.00
That number is worthy of giggles because while it dwarfs every other potential candidate's cash on hand, it doesn't matter - it's for his county sheriff candidacy and cannot be transferred to a federal committee.
While there has been a little internet chatter over a possible Pastor candidacy and his well-stocked campaign warchest and some of the other potential candidates have little or no cash for a federal campaign, once a legit candidate enters the race he or she will be able to raise money quickly.
Of course, they'll have to. :)
Thursday, February 10, 2011
The musical theme for the race to replace Jon Kyl: Yakety Sax
Add another to the list of folks considering a run for AZ-Sen...and I could have chosen "Send In The Clowns," but anybody who has ever seen Benny Hill smiles when they hear the strains of Boots Randolph's classic...and I wanted to smile...
From the National Journal's "Hotline On Call" -
However, next year's ballot will include an open Senate seat (Kyl's), an open Congressional seat (the new one after redistricting), eight redistricted Congressional seats, and 90 redistricted legislative seats.
*Anything* could happen.
From the National Journal's "Hotline On Call" -
Controversial Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is calling top Republicans in Arizona, soliciting advice over a possible Senate run, according to sources.If I had to bet, I'd bet that this is just a tease. Every four years, Arpaio teases about running for governor, but he doesn't go through with it. This just gets him some cheap media coverage.
Arpaio, best known for his hard line against illegal immigrants, his constant battles with the Justice Department over immigration sweeps and his forcing county inmates to wear pink underwear, is expressing at least initial interest in running for the seat that will be vacated by Sen. Jon Kyl (R) next year.
However, next year's ballot will include an open Senate seat (Kyl's), an open Congressional seat (the new one after redistricting), eight redistricted Congressional seats, and 90 redistricted legislative seats.
*Anything* could happen.
Governor Jan Brewer's first jobs action: The "Full Employment For Lawyers" Initiative
From AP, via the Arizona Republic -
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer says she plans to file a counter-lawsuit against the federal government for failing to enforce immigration laws.Wonder how many teachers will have to be laid off or how many more transplant patients will have to die to pay for Jan's (and her clan's) bigotry?
Brewer says her claim will be filed in the federal government's challenge to Arizona's new enforcement immigration law.
*Very* early speculation on possible 2012 candidates for AZ-Sen
Two months ago, expectations were that Jon Kyl was going to run for reelection, easily defeating any Republican primary challenger (likely a tea party type) and face, perhaps, Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in the general election.
What a difference two months, a bullet from a would-be assassin, and a retirement announcement make.
Now, next year's AZ Senate race, and as a result, possibly many down-ballot races, is wide open.
Some names you are sure to hear bandied about in the coming days and week (and in the interests of avoiding actual journalistic activity, no potential candidates were contacted for this piece :) ) -
Republican Jeff Flake - current CD6 Congressman and presumed to be one of the GOP establishment's favorites when it comes to replacing Kyl. Has been patiently waiting his turn. Probably *the* favorite right now.
Republican John Shadegg - former CD3 Congressman and currently with the Goldwater Institute. Also a GOP establishment favorite.
Republican JD Hayworth - nativist, former Congressman (Hayworth lost to Democrat Harry Mitchell in 2006), challenger to John McCain (Hayworth was crushed in the 2010 primary), former local TV news sports anchor, and current radio talk show host. A favorite candidate of the Hayworth clan. Might run, probably won't win the GOP primary.
Republican Ben Quayle - current CD3 Congressman. A freshman member of Congress with no accomplishments, either before or during his political career, but his father is Dan Quayle, who brings a lot of money and contacts into his son's camp. Probably not going to run this time, will wait for McCain to retire (gotta happen sometime this century, right? :) ).
Republican Trent Franks - current CD2 Congressman. One issue candidate/public official (anti-choice) and not known as the brightest star in the nighttime sky. Having said that, could go for it, depending on what his district looks like after redistricting.
Republican Jan Brewer - Current Arizona Governor. Not the quickest thinker or the most adept public speaker, but that didn't make a difference in the 2010 election. She's term-limited and cannot seek reelection in 2014, so if she has any more political ambitions, this would be her best shot. Under AZ law, would have to resign to run. BTW - before anyone thinks I am unfairly insulting her with the comments about "quick thinking" and her public speaking ability, I am fully cognizant of the fact that she has been in one elected office or another for most of the last three decades. She may not dazzle anyone with her intellect or speeches, but she's got some game.
Republicans Paul Gosar and David Schweikert - current CD1 and CD5 Congressmen, respectively. Could happen, but both are relatively young and freshmen in Congress. Probably will focus on defending their redistricted seats.
Democrat Janet Napolitano - former Arizona Governor and current US Secretary of Homeland Security. If she returns to AZ and runs, she automatically becomes the favorite in any Democratic primary. Known as incredibly smart and pragmatic/centrist. DC connections give her access to lots of campaign $$. May be the best candidate for downballot Democrats because she had long coattails when on the ballot here in the past.
Democrat Harry Mitchell - former CD5 Congressman, State Senator, Mayor of Tempe, and career school teacher. A favorite of everyone who knows him. May be more likely to go for a return match with Schweikert.
Democrats Cathy Eden, John Dougherty, Randy Parraz, and Rodney Glassman - all ran for the D nomination in 2010, to challenge John McCain. Glassman won the primary and was trounced in the general. Glassman seems likely to run for Mayor of Tucson at this point. Don't know much about the others.
Democrat Phil Gordon - current (and soon-to-be former) Mayor of Phoenix. Perhaps the purest "old school" politician of this entire list, has the best machine in the state's biggest city. However, he's got some serious baggage ("city contracts to his girlfriend" kind of stuff) and is *not* a favorite of the Democratic grassroots outside of Phoenix. Could run (he's not likely to have anything better to do next year), but probably won't get through a D primary if he enters the race.
Democrat Raul Grijalva - current CD7 Congressman. A favorite of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Not sure if his popularity within his district would translate to a statewide run. On the other hand, given the changing demographics of AZ's electorate, if there is a pushback against the nativists in the legislature and the GOP as a whole, the wave could carry him to the US Senate. Not likely, but a Grijalva candidacy shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.
Democrat Terry Goddard - former AZ Attorney General and 2010 candidate for Governor. Well-liked by AZ Dems and well-respected within the Attorney General community, was rumored to be a possible candidate to challenge Kyl.
Wild Card: Democrat Gabrielle Giffords - current CD8 Congresswoman. Five weeks ago, she would have been the odds-on favorite to win a D primary, and a strong contender in the general election against any R. Now, it all depends on her recovery from the assassination attempt in Tucson.
If she has a full or near-full recovery, she will be near-unstoppable in a D primary (only Napolitano would have a real chance against her), and be the likely favorite in a general election against any of the Rs.
However, the fact that she survived a bullet through her brain is a miracle, and expecting anything more is just being greedy. Her recovery thus far has been incredible, but plateaus and even setbacks *will* happen. She has a long way to go before she is ready for a statewide campaign. She (and we) will know more by late summer/early fall.
And even that is assuming that she still *wants* a Senate seat after everything that has happened.
Other names to consider, all of whom seem unlikely to run:
Democrat Ed Pastor, current CD4 Congressman
Democrat Ann Kirkpatrick, former CD1 Congresswoman
Republicans "Buz" Mills and John Munger, 2010 candidates for Governor. Lots of money.
Republican Tom Horne - current AZ AG. Wants to be Governor.
Republican Ken Bennett - current AZ Secretary of State. Not sure if he wants it, but probably wouldn't have a problem with Brewer going for it - he'd become Governor if she did.
I know there are names that I've missed, but there will be time to discuss those in the coming weeks. Feel free to include them in any comments.
BTW - don't expect today's announcement to quell any "Kyl for VP" whispers - at his announcement press conference, he spoke about an "opportunity to do something else". Quotes like this won't help either.
What a difference two months, a bullet from a would-be assassin, and a retirement announcement make.
Now, next year's AZ Senate race, and as a result, possibly many down-ballot races, is wide open.
Some names you are sure to hear bandied about in the coming days and week (and in the interests of avoiding actual journalistic activity, no potential candidates were contacted for this piece :) ) -
Republican Jeff Flake - current CD6 Congressman and presumed to be one of the GOP establishment's favorites when it comes to replacing Kyl. Has been patiently waiting his turn. Probably *the* favorite right now.
Republican John Shadegg - former CD3 Congressman and currently with the Goldwater Institute. Also a GOP establishment favorite.
Republican JD Hayworth - nativist, former Congressman (Hayworth lost to Democrat Harry Mitchell in 2006), challenger to John McCain (Hayworth was crushed in the 2010 primary), former local TV news sports anchor, and current radio talk show host. A favorite candidate of the Hayworth clan. Might run, probably won't win the GOP primary.
Republican Ben Quayle - current CD3 Congressman. A freshman member of Congress with no accomplishments, either before or during his political career, but his father is Dan Quayle, who brings a lot of money and contacts into his son's camp. Probably not going to run this time, will wait for McCain to retire (gotta happen sometime this century, right? :) ).
Republican Trent Franks - current CD2 Congressman. One issue candidate/public official (anti-choice) and not known as the brightest star in the nighttime sky. Having said that, could go for it, depending on what his district looks like after redistricting.
Republican Jan Brewer - Current Arizona Governor. Not the quickest thinker or the most adept public speaker, but that didn't make a difference in the 2010 election. She's term-limited and cannot seek reelection in 2014, so if she has any more political ambitions, this would be her best shot. Under AZ law, would have to resign to run. BTW - before anyone thinks I am unfairly insulting her with the comments about "quick thinking" and her public speaking ability, I am fully cognizant of the fact that she has been in one elected office or another for most of the last three decades. She may not dazzle anyone with her intellect or speeches, but she's got some game.
Republicans Paul Gosar and David Schweikert - current CD1 and CD5 Congressmen, respectively. Could happen, but both are relatively young and freshmen in Congress. Probably will focus on defending their redistricted seats.
Democrat Janet Napolitano - former Arizona Governor and current US Secretary of Homeland Security. If she returns to AZ and runs, she automatically becomes the favorite in any Democratic primary. Known as incredibly smart and pragmatic/centrist. DC connections give her access to lots of campaign $$. May be the best candidate for downballot Democrats because she had long coattails when on the ballot here in the past.
Democrat Harry Mitchell - former CD5 Congressman, State Senator, Mayor of Tempe, and career school teacher. A favorite of everyone who knows him. May be more likely to go for a return match with Schweikert.
Democrats Cathy Eden, John Dougherty, Randy Parraz, and Rodney Glassman - all ran for the D nomination in 2010, to challenge John McCain. Glassman won the primary and was trounced in the general. Glassman seems likely to run for Mayor of Tucson at this point. Don't know much about the others.
Democrat Phil Gordon - current (and soon-to-be former) Mayor of Phoenix. Perhaps the purest "old school" politician of this entire list, has the best machine in the state's biggest city. However, he's got some serious baggage ("city contracts to his girlfriend" kind of stuff) and is *not* a favorite of the Democratic grassroots outside of Phoenix. Could run (he's not likely to have anything better to do next year), but probably won't get through a D primary if he enters the race.
Democrat Raul Grijalva - current CD7 Congressman. A favorite of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Not sure if his popularity within his district would translate to a statewide run. On the other hand, given the changing demographics of AZ's electorate, if there is a pushback against the nativists in the legislature and the GOP as a whole, the wave could carry him to the US Senate. Not likely, but a Grijalva candidacy shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.
Democrat Terry Goddard - former AZ Attorney General and 2010 candidate for Governor. Well-liked by AZ Dems and well-respected within the Attorney General community, was rumored to be a possible candidate to challenge Kyl.
Wild Card: Democrat Gabrielle Giffords - current CD8 Congresswoman. Five weeks ago, she would have been the odds-on favorite to win a D primary, and a strong contender in the general election against any R. Now, it all depends on her recovery from the assassination attempt in Tucson.
If she has a full or near-full recovery, she will be near-unstoppable in a D primary (only Napolitano would have a real chance against her), and be the likely favorite in a general election against any of the Rs.
However, the fact that she survived a bullet through her brain is a miracle, and expecting anything more is just being greedy. Her recovery thus far has been incredible, but plateaus and even setbacks *will* happen. She has a long way to go before she is ready for a statewide campaign. She (and we) will know more by late summer/early fall.
And even that is assuming that she still *wants* a Senate seat after everything that has happened.
Other names to consider, all of whom seem unlikely to run:
Democrat Ed Pastor, current CD4 Congressman
Democrat Ann Kirkpatrick, former CD1 Congresswoman
Republicans "Buz" Mills and John Munger, 2010 candidates for Governor. Lots of money.
Republican Tom Horne - current AZ AG. Wants to be Governor.
Republican Ken Bennett - current AZ Secretary of State. Not sure if he wants it, but probably wouldn't have a problem with Brewer going for it - he'd become Governor if she did.
I know there are names that I've missed, but there will be time to discuss those in the coming weeks. Feel free to include them in any comments.
BTW - don't expect today's announcement to quell any "Kyl for VP" whispers - at his announcement press conference, he spoke about an "opportunity to do something else". Quotes like this won't help either.
Breaking: Politico.com reporting Jon Kyl not running for reelection
Thanks for the heads-up on this goes out to the blog Arizona's Politics...
From Politico, written by David Catanese -
Look for Republicans Jeff Flake and John Shadegg, current and former members of Congress, respectively, to be two of the most prominent names in any discussion of potential candidates to replace Kyl.
They won't be the *only* ones, however.
More later...
From Politico, written by David Catanese -
Kyl to retire, won't seek another termAssuming this report is accurate, and rumors to this effect have been swirling for weeks, even months, this development, along with redistricting and the addition of a ninth Congressional seat to Arizona, would turn next year's elections here into complete free-for-all.
Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl will announce he won't seek another term at a press conference in his home state Thursday morning, POLITICO has learned.
The third-term Kyl was first elected to the Senate in 1994.
A GOP operative notes that the last time Arizona elected a Democrat to the U.S. Senate was 1988 -- 22 years ago.
Look for Republicans Jeff Flake and John Shadegg, current and former members of Congress, respectively, to be two of the most prominent names in any discussion of potential candidates to replace Kyl.
They won't be the *only* ones, however.
More later...
Wednesday, February 09, 2011
Rep. Ed Ableser introduces a version of the Utah Compact into the Arizona Legislature
LD17's Representative Ed Ableser has introduced HCR2038, a resolution patterned after the famous Utah Compact. It lists a set of principles for a civil discussion of immigration issues.
I'm enough of a cynic that I'm sure it won't go anywhere in the Arizona legislature but it's definitely worthy of posting here -
I'm enough of a cynic that I'm sure it won't go anywhere in the Arizona legislature but it's definitely worthy of posting here -
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Arizona, the Senate concurring:The measure was introduced on February 9 ("today" as I'm writing this) and assigned to the House Government Committee.
That in discussing immigration issues the citizens of this state should be guided by the following principles:
1. Immigration is a federal policy issue between the United States government and other countries, not Arizona and other countries. Arizona's congressional delegation, and others, should lead efforts to strengthen federal laws and protect our national borders and state leaders should adopt reasonable policies addressing immigrants in Arizona.
2. We respect the rule of law and support the professional judgment and discretion of law enforcement authorities. Local law enforcement resources should focus on criminal activities, not civil violations of the federal code.
3. Strong families are the foundation of successful communities. We oppose policies that unnecessarily separate families. We champion policies that support families and improve the health, education and well-being of all Arizona children.
4. Arizona is best served by a free-market philosophy that maximizes individual freedom and opportunity. We acknowledge the economic role immigrants play as workers and taxpayers. Arizona's immigration policies must reaffirm our global reputation as a welcoming and business-friendly state.
5. Immigrants are integrated into communities across Arizona. We must adopt a humane approach to this reality, reflecting our unique culture, history and spirit of inclusion. The way we treat immigrants says more about us as a free society and less about our immigrant neighbors. Arizona should always be a place that welcomes people of goodwill.
Anti-14th Amendment/Birthright Citizenship update: Bills transferred to friendlier committee
On Monday, the Judiciary Committee of the Arizona Senate failed to move two nativist-written and -sponsored anti-birthright citizenship bills.
On Tuesday, Senate President Russell Pearce withdrew the bills from Judiciary to the Appropriations Committee for consideration (SB1309 and SB1308).
They are scheduled for consideration there on Tuesday, February 15 (next Tuesday) at 2 p.m. in SHR109.
The bills are expected to find a far friendlier reception in Appropriations than in Judiciary.
While there is some overlap between the memberships of the two committees, it's an overlap that favors passage.
On the Judiciary Committee, Ron Gould and Andy Biggs are the chair and vice-chair respectively; on Appropriations, they switch jobs.
Both favored the bills.
In addition, Judiciary member Rick Murphy is also on Appropriations, and he favored the bills at Monday's hearing.
Opponent Adam Driggs and (likely) opponent John McComish are NOT on Appropriations, so their voices and their votes won't be heard Tuesday.
Instead, the Republicans hearing the bill will be:
Sylvia Allen, Russell Pearce's close friend and ally
Andy Biggs, who has already made it clear that he wholeheartedly supports the bills and a cosponsor of both
Rich Crandall, a very conservative Republican who has occasional bouts of sanity
Ron Gould, who is known for celebrating the 4th of July by flying a Confederate flag in his backyard and is the originating sponsor of both measures
Lori Klein, who started the latest dustup over legislators carrying guns at the Capitol and a cosponsor of both measures
Al Melvin, who is a cosponsor of both measures
Rick Murphy, who is also a cosponsor of both measures
Don Shooter, another cosponsor and Kool-Aid drinker (and purveyor)
Steve Smith, yet another cosponsor of both measures
The Appropriations Committee is larger than Judiciary (13 members vs. 8), so it will need at least seven votes to pass, but by my count, at least seven members are sponsors/cosponsors, and Sylvia Allen is expected to vote whatever way Russell Pearce wants her to (to be fair to Allen, she appears to be a "true believer," not a tool...not exactly a marked improvement, that).
That leaves Rich Crandall, who though known for occasionally not being a total ideologue, doesn't let sanity or decency get in the way of a safe political future. He voted for SB1070 last year.
The bottom line: SBs 1308 and 1309 will pass Appropriations by an 8 - 5 or 9 - 4 vote.
The brightest spot in all this? Kyrsten Sinema, who eloquently and strongly debunked the nativists in the Senate Judiciary hearing, is also a member of Appropriations. She will be joined by fellow Democrats Olivia Cajero Bedford, Paula Aboud, and Senate Democratic Leader David Schapira.
See you Tuesday, and bring your popcorn...
On Tuesday, Senate President Russell Pearce withdrew the bills from Judiciary to the Appropriations Committee for consideration (SB1309 and SB1308).
They are scheduled for consideration there on Tuesday, February 15 (next Tuesday) at 2 p.m. in SHR109.
The bills are expected to find a far friendlier reception in Appropriations than in Judiciary.
While there is some overlap between the memberships of the two committees, it's an overlap that favors passage.
On the Judiciary Committee, Ron Gould and Andy Biggs are the chair and vice-chair respectively; on Appropriations, they switch jobs.
Both favored the bills.
In addition, Judiciary member Rick Murphy is also on Appropriations, and he favored the bills at Monday's hearing.
Opponent Adam Driggs and (likely) opponent John McComish are NOT on Appropriations, so their voices and their votes won't be heard Tuesday.
Instead, the Republicans hearing the bill will be:
Sylvia Allen, Russell Pearce's close friend and ally
Andy Biggs, who has already made it clear that he wholeheartedly supports the bills and a cosponsor of both
Rich Crandall, a very conservative Republican who has occasional bouts of sanity
Ron Gould, who is known for celebrating the 4th of July by flying a Confederate flag in his backyard and is the originating sponsor of both measures
Lori Klein, who started the latest dustup over legislators carrying guns at the Capitol and a cosponsor of both measures
Al Melvin, who is a cosponsor of both measures
Rick Murphy, who is also a cosponsor of both measures
Don Shooter, another cosponsor and Kool-Aid drinker (and purveyor)
Steve Smith, yet another cosponsor of both measures
The Appropriations Committee is larger than Judiciary (13 members vs. 8), so it will need at least seven votes to pass, but by my count, at least seven members are sponsors/cosponsors, and Sylvia Allen is expected to vote whatever way Russell Pearce wants her to (to be fair to Allen, she appears to be a "true believer," not a tool...not exactly a marked improvement, that).
That leaves Rich Crandall, who though known for occasionally not being a total ideologue, doesn't let sanity or decency get in the way of a safe political future. He voted for SB1070 last year.
The bottom line: SBs 1308 and 1309 will pass Appropriations by an 8 - 5 or 9 - 4 vote.
The brightest spot in all this? Kyrsten Sinema, who eloquently and strongly debunked the nativists in the Senate Judiciary hearing, is also a member of Appropriations. She will be joined by fellow Democrats Olivia Cajero Bedford, Paula Aboud, and Senate Democratic Leader David Schapira.
See you Tuesday, and bring your popcorn...
Redistricting Update: Pearce names Richard Stertz to Redistricting Commission
From the Arizona Daily Star, written by Rhonda Bodfield -
From the Arizona Republic, written by Mary Jo Pitzl -
From Stertz' application for the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission -
Oh, and that oath was notarized.
So it seems possible, even likely, that Russell "it's the law!" Pearce has knowingly appointed a perjurer to the AIRC.
Apparently, Pearce expects that only dark-skinned people have to respect the law.
Welcome to Arizona politics.
Senate President Russell Pearce picked Pima County Republican Richard Stertz to serve as the third member of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission.The "late taxes" and other "civil litigation" that weren't disclosed by Stertz on his application are just a wee bit more significant than Bodfield's single subordinate clause would indicate.
Stertz, who runs a faith-based organization geared toward getting churches more involved in the community, won out over Benny White, another Tucson Republican. The commission is charged with redrawing political boundaries using new census figures.
Stertz, who had some late taxes and some earlier civil litigation that was not disclosed on his application, was placed into the mix after Pearce and House Speaker Kirk Adams challenged some members of the initial selection.
From the Arizona Republic, written by Mary Jo Pitzl -
A candidate on Senate President Russell Pearce's short list for a committee to redraw Arizona's political boundaries failed to disclose tax liens and court judgments against him, although such disclosure is required.
Rick Stertz, in his application for the Independent Redistricting Commission, indicated that he had paid all taxes when due and that he had no court judgments filed against him.The tax lien records are here, also courtesy the Arizona Republic.
Records in Pima County show otherwise; there are at least four court cases in which judgments were filed against Stertz, as well as two federal tax liens.
From Stertz' application for the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission -
10. Have you paid all state, federal, and local taxes when due? Yes (X) No ( ) If your answer is "No," explain by attachment.At the end of the application form, he swore an oath that "the statements contained in this application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge."
Oh, and that oath was notarized.
So it seems possible, even likely, that Russell "it's the law!" Pearce has knowingly appointed a perjurer to the AIRC.
Apparently, Pearce expects that only dark-skinned people have to respect the law.
Welcome to Arizona politics.
A quick history lesson for rookie legislators
Terri Proud, a Tucson tea party type and freshman Republican legislator, has introduced HB2657, a measure to require that all municipal and school board elections be conducted as partisan affairs.
Ummmm. OK. Really.
I just wonder if, before she sacrificed a tree to put her brilliant idea onto paper, she spoke to any of the other Republicans in the legislature. Or even those from her district in Tucson.
I suspect not, because anybody who can recall the deepest parts of Arizona history...or at least back to 2009.
SB1123.
Sponsored by a slew of southern AZ Republicans, including her current seatmate Vic Williams, it prohibited municipalities from holding partisan municipal elections. It was targeted at Tucson, which was the only municipality in the state that held partisan elections.
The measure was a going-away gift from former Sen. Jonathan Paton, who would soon resign from the lege in order to focus on a run for Congress (he lost in the R primary to Jesse Kelly).
Paton and the Tucson Republicans were overjoyed at SB1123's passage, not because they opposed the idea of partisan elections, but because they almost always get their butts kicked in Tucson when they run as Republicans.
Proud's measure would roll back that perceived gain.
As of this writing, the bill has not been assigned to a committee, and since most of the House R leadership has been around a while and aren't forgetful, I don't expect this bill to go far.
Ummmm. OK. Really.
I just wonder if, before she sacrificed a tree to put her brilliant idea onto paper, she spoke to any of the other Republicans in the legislature. Or even those from her district in Tucson.
I suspect not, because anybody who can recall the deepest parts of Arizona history...or at least back to 2009.
SB1123.
Sponsored by a slew of southern AZ Republicans, including her current seatmate Vic Williams, it prohibited municipalities from holding partisan municipal elections. It was targeted at Tucson, which was the only municipality in the state that held partisan elections.
The measure was a going-away gift from former Sen. Jonathan Paton, who would soon resign from the lege in order to focus on a run for Congress (he lost in the R primary to Jesse Kelly).
Paton and the Tucson Republicans were overjoyed at SB1123's passage, not because they opposed the idea of partisan elections, but because they almost always get their butts kicked in Tucson when they run as Republicans.
Proud's measure would roll back that perceived gain.
As of this writing, the bill has not been assigned to a committee, and since most of the House R leadership has been around a while and aren't forgetful, I don't expect this bill to go far.
David Schweikert: "Master Of The Budget Numbers", or "Master Of The Lobbyist Payoff Game"?
David Schweikert (R-Club for Growth) was the subject of a recent puff piece on the conservative news site Human Events (of course, calling it a "news" site is like calling Bristol Palin a "dancer").
The writer lauded Schweikert (as Schweikert lauded himself) for being a "fiscal conservative" and touting his desire to rein in federal debt.
Schweikert feels that government spending beyonds its means is dreadful and must be stopped at all costs except, possibly, for raising taxes on the wealthy and corporations. He has even proposed an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, H.J. Res. 23, that would mandate that the federal budget be balanced (no text available online yet as the measure was introduced just yesterday).
That feeling, however, doesn't apply to his *own* spending. Nope, he's a lot more "flexible" where that is concerned.
According to his most recent FEC filing, his campaign has a little more that $16K cash on hand, while over $500K in debt and loan obligations, almost all to himself ($500K in loans).
Not to worry though, as Schweikert is a man with a plan.
In this case, he's got a lobbyist schmoozefest/begging session scheduled for Thursday in DC.
Information on the event, courtesy the Sunlight Foundation -
Basically, Schweikert has officially "loaned" his campaigns (2008 and 2010) half a million dollars and now as a sitting member of Congress, he is now reaching out for lobbyist handouts to pay for his profligate personal spending.
At this point, I'd normally make a crack about watching for Schweikert to place advocating for the interests of corporations before advocating for the interests of his official constituents, the people of Arizona's 5th Congressional District.
However, it's long been known that if someone's last name can't be abbreviated "Corp.", "Inc.", or "LLC", Foreclosure Dave isn't there for them*.
* = One exception: If that someone's job title can be abbreviated "CEO"...
P.S. - If you don't believe me, check out the list of contributors from his most recent FEC filing (linked above).
Perhaps if Schweikert wants people to believe that he is truly an advocate for fiscal responsibility, he should try, you know, *being* fiscally responsible. Right now, however, it looks like the only things that differentiates him from JD Hayworth, the most recent Republican to hold the AZ5 seat, are visibly longer hair and no visible ties to Jack Abramoff.
Of course, Abramoff was released from confinement less than two months ago, so it may take a little more time for him to rebuild his "circle of influence."
The writer lauded Schweikert (as Schweikert lauded himself) for being a "fiscal conservative" and touting his desire to rein in federal debt.
Schweikert feels that government spending beyonds its means is dreadful and must be stopped at all costs except, possibly, for raising taxes on the wealthy and corporations. He has even proposed an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, H.J. Res. 23, that would mandate that the federal budget be balanced (no text available online yet as the measure was introduced just yesterday).
That feeling, however, doesn't apply to his *own* spending. Nope, he's a lot more "flexible" where that is concerned.
According to his most recent FEC filing, his campaign has a little more that $16K cash on hand, while over $500K in debt and loan obligations, almost all to himself ($500K in loans).
Not to worry though, as Schweikert is a man with a plan.
In this case, he's got a lobbyist schmoozefest/begging session scheduled for Thursday in DC.
Information on the event, courtesy the Sunlight Foundation -
For: David Schweikert (R, AZ-5)This looks a whole lot like money laundering, and I'm not talking about the "Make Checks Payable To: Manzullo for Congress" instruction - I *think* that's a typo as both Schweikert and Don Manzullo (R-IL16) are both clients of Hammond and Associates, a Republican fundraising "consultant." They (Hammond and Associates) have the same mailing address on their website as is listed on the invitation.
When: Feb. 10th, 2011 (6 p.m.)
Where: Acadiana - 901 New York Ave NW
Type of Event: Dinner
Contribution Information: $2,500 Host; $1,000 PAC; $500 Individual
Make Checks Payable To: Manzullo for Congress - PO Box 368 Falls Church, VA 22040
RSVP: Meredith Hurt; mhurt@thehammondgrp.com
Basically, Schweikert has officially "loaned" his campaigns (2008 and 2010) half a million dollars and now as a sitting member of Congress, he is now reaching out for lobbyist handouts to pay for his profligate personal spending.
At this point, I'd normally make a crack about watching for Schweikert to place advocating for the interests of corporations before advocating for the interests of his official constituents, the people of Arizona's 5th Congressional District.
However, it's long been known that if someone's last name can't be abbreviated "Corp.", "Inc.", or "LLC", Foreclosure Dave isn't there for them*.
* = One exception: If that someone's job title can be abbreviated "CEO"...
P.S. - If you don't believe me, check out the list of contributors from his most recent FEC filing (linked above).
Perhaps if Schweikert wants people to believe that he is truly an advocate for fiscal responsibility, he should try, you know, *being* fiscally responsible. Right now, however, it looks like the only things that differentiates him from JD Hayworth, the most recent Republican to hold the AZ5 seat, are visibly longer hair and no visible ties to Jack Abramoff.
Of course, Abramoff was released from confinement less than two months ago, so it may take a little more time for him to rebuild his "circle of influence."
Tuesday, February 08, 2011
Apparently, AZGOPers play favorites when it comes to the Bill of Rights
While the Founding Fathers may have placed the First Amendment to the US Constitution first, it's one of the Rs least favorites, at least based on their behavior Monday.
- In the House Ways and Means Committee meeting, committee chair Jack Harper (R-Surprise!) refused to allow a representative from the Maricopa Integrated Health System (MIHS) to speak on a bill that would micromanage MIHS' procurement procedures.
From Mary Jo Pitzl, writing for the Arizona Republic -
He gavelled down applause, barked at a photographer for disrupting "his" (Gould's) meeting and interrupted and challenged any speaker who said something he didn't agree with. In fact, the only public speakers that I saw him act courteously toward were John Eastman (speaking on the anti-14th Amendment bills) and John Wentling (speaking in favor of the "firearms omnibus" bill).
Both were there to support Gould's position on the bills. Probably not a coincidence, that.
The video archives of the meetings (2/7/2011) can be found here. Note: the audio quality of the Ways and Means hearing is poor constantly, fading in and out.
- In the House Ways and Means Committee meeting, committee chair Jack Harper (R-Surprise!) refused to allow a representative from the Maricopa Integrated Health System (MIHS) to speak on a bill that would micromanage MIHS' procurement procedures.
From Mary Jo Pitzl, writing for the Arizona Republic -
In a public hearing, not all are equal . . . or heard ... at least not in Rep. Jack Harper's Ways and Means Committee.- And across the Capitol quad in the Senate building, Sen. Ron Gould was running the Senate Judiciary meeting with a tool that was less "gavel" and more "sledge hammer."
Harper refused to let a lobbyist for the Maricopa Integrated Health System speak Monday on House Bill 2207. The bill would require MIHS to use "competitive procurement rules" or adopt those used by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors when it comes to buying equipment and certain services.
It was the third time the bill has been before the committee, but a strike-everything amendment changed its direction from an earlier version. MIHS lobbyist John McDonald asked to testify, but Harper refused, saying nothing was served by "having a lobbyist here to speak against the taxpayer week in and week out."
He gavelled down applause, barked at a photographer for disrupting "his" (Gould's) meeting and interrupted and challenged any speaker who said something he didn't agree with. In fact, the only public speakers that I saw him act courteously toward were John Eastman (speaking on the anti-14th Amendment bills) and John Wentling (speaking in favor of the "firearms omnibus" bill).
Both were there to support Gould's position on the bills. Probably not a coincidence, that.
The video archives of the meetings (2/7/2011) can be found here. Note: the audio quality of the Ways and Means hearing is poor constantly, fading in and out.
Monday, February 07, 2011
Texas 1963 --- Arizona 2011
A guest post from Jerry Gettinger of Scottsdale, a friend and a friend of the blog -
I was a young 23, starting a career and living in San Antonio, Texas. It was late November in 1963 when I and the rest of a 50 person office heard that JFK was going to pass by the office on his way to the airport. Very exciting. The office was on the ground floor and maybe 20 yards from the street to where I was standing along with a few “buddies.” Suddenly, a wave of sound came around the corner and there he was…and Jackie also and in the back seat the Governor, John Connelly and his wife. The car was a Lincoln convertible, big and Presidential-looking. There was only one policeman who was responsible for keeping the crowd at bay. And he really wasn’t needed. We were all well-behaved in those days. Of course there were Secret Service men running along-side.
As JFK passed by a thought came into my mind. I turned to my friend and mentioned how easy it would be to put a bullet into the president. But who would think of doing such a thing? Would never happen. As I think back, it was so obvious and so easy that it should not have been surprising that it did happen. The next day, I was at my desk talking to a customer when he said there was something on the TV about JFK being shot. I put the phone down and was about to yell when someone came running in and yelled that the President had been shot in Dallas. I looked over at the friend to whom I had remarked the day before. Our eyes met and there was that look of disbelief. But it was true and JFK was dead a short while later.I can’t explain it, but I have always had the feeling that everything changed when JFK died. It was never the same again. No one was safe, there were no rules anymore. Martin Luther King, Robert Kennedy, Columbine High School, Virginia Tech and now Tucson. It sounds cold, but what happened in Tucson was not a surprise. It was shocking and even more so, sad, sad, sad. But not surprising. I haven’t heard anyone say that the senseless massacre was a surprise. It started on a chilly day in Texas and continues in Tucson. The players change. The method is the same (guns), although the numbers have increased along with the ability to kill faster. Hi-Tech. Tucson, we hope is a turning point, like Columbine High School, or Virginia Tech, or, who knows what is next.
I remember as if it were yesterday. JFK was bigger than life in person, and Jackie was hot. Every time there is a tragedy I think back to that open car that the president was in. So vulnerable. Only this time, it was a 9- year-old child and many more. When are we going to stop the craziness? Buying assault weapons for target practice? On who? A nine year old? If something isn’t done, there will be another. That is certain. Tucson was not an isolated event perpetrated by a lunatic. (Shooting a nine year old child?). It was another episode in a series. An incident made all too easy by our so-called gun laws. Heck of a job, NRA. Your money has made gun laws a joke. The TV program Gun Smoke is now a reality show being filmed at your corner supermarket. Who knows, you too can be a star. Finally, explain to me how a magazine holding 50 bullets is good for anything but, oh well, you know.
Jerry Gettinger
Later...
I was a young 23, starting a career and living in San Antonio, Texas. It was late November in 1963 when I and the rest of a 50 person office heard that JFK was going to pass by the office on his way to the airport. Very exciting. The office was on the ground floor and maybe 20 yards from the street to where I was standing along with a few “buddies.” Suddenly, a wave of sound came around the corner and there he was…and Jackie also and in the back seat the Governor, John Connelly and his wife. The car was a Lincoln convertible, big and Presidential-looking. There was only one policeman who was responsible for keeping the crowd at bay. And he really wasn’t needed. We were all well-behaved in those days. Of course there were Secret Service men running along-side.
As JFK passed by a thought came into my mind. I turned to my friend and mentioned how easy it would be to put a bullet into the president. But who would think of doing such a thing? Would never happen. As I think back, it was so obvious and so easy that it should not have been surprising that it did happen. The next day, I was at my desk talking to a customer when he said there was something on the TV about JFK being shot. I put the phone down and was about to yell when someone came running in and yelled that the President had been shot in Dallas. I looked over at the friend to whom I had remarked the day before. Our eyes met and there was that look of disbelief. But it was true and JFK was dead a short while later.I can’t explain it, but I have always had the feeling that everything changed when JFK died. It was never the same again. No one was safe, there were no rules anymore. Martin Luther King, Robert Kennedy, Columbine High School, Virginia Tech and now Tucson. It sounds cold, but what happened in Tucson was not a surprise. It was shocking and even more so, sad, sad, sad. But not surprising. I haven’t heard anyone say that the senseless massacre was a surprise. It started on a chilly day in Texas and continues in Tucson. The players change. The method is the same (guns), although the numbers have increased along with the ability to kill faster. Hi-Tech. Tucson, we hope is a turning point, like Columbine High School, or Virginia Tech, or, who knows what is next.
I remember as if it were yesterday. JFK was bigger than life in person, and Jackie was hot. Every time there is a tragedy I think back to that open car that the president was in. So vulnerable. Only this time, it was a 9- year-old child and many more. When are we going to stop the craziness? Buying assault weapons for target practice? On who? A nine year old? If something isn’t done, there will be another. That is certain. Tucson was not an isolated event perpetrated by a lunatic. (Shooting a nine year old child?). It was another episode in a series. An incident made all too easy by our so-called gun laws. Heck of a job, NRA. Your money has made gun laws a joke. The TV program Gun Smoke is now a reality show being filmed at your corner supermarket. Who knows, you too can be a star. Finally, explain to me how a magazine holding 50 bullets is good for anything but, oh well, you know.
Jerry Gettinger
Later...
Senate Judiciary Holds Anti-14th Amendment Bills
...but this isn't over yet.
Before a packed meeting room, the Judiciary Committee of the Arizona Senate listened to well over two hours of testimony regarding SB1308 and SB1309, the anti-14th Amendment/birthright citizenship bills proposed by Sen. Ron Gould, the committee's chair.
Anybody who watched the proceedings, in person or over the internet, was treated to a mindnumbing showcase of constitutional law knowledge and ignorance.
The lead actor in that part of Monday's political theater was one John Eastman, a law schoo dean from California. Dr. Eastman's biography boasts of his clerkship for US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. He also regularly weighs in on things like torture, school vouchers, expansive Presidential power, and more, always supporting the "conservative" position. In short, he was an out-of-town ringer brought in by Gould and Pearce for just this event.
Eastman droned on for well over 90 minutes, basically arguing that everyone of the "interpretations" of the 14th Amendment over the last 140+ years was wrong and that his "interpretation" was the correct one.
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema served as the main counterpoint to Eastman's misinformation, drawing on her own intelligence and legal knowledge to successfully refute Eastman's arguments. Republican Senator Adam Driggs, a lawyer too, also pushed back against Eastman.
I'm not recounting the discussion in it entirety because it was too long and technical for me to follow closely, but friend of mine who works in the justice system was watching, described Eastman's arguments as erroneous (OK, a different word was used, but in the interests of keeping this post family-friendly... :) ).
The video of the meeting will eventually be posted on the legislature's website here (look for Senate Judiciary on 2/7/2011).
While I can't completely summarize the legal arguments between Sinema and Driggs on one side and Eastman on the other, I can list some of the better quotes of the meeting -
"The bills would have no effect unless the federal government takes steps" - Gould (then why waste the taxpayers' time and resources with this crap)
"I'm the 'Clarence Thomas' of this committee - I don't ask many questions" -Sen. John McComish
The bills "could shame our state" - Jennifer Allen of the Border Action Network
The proposals would "create multiple generations of children without a nation, a community" - Dana Naimark of Childrens Action Alliance
Three children, ages 11 and 12, spoke on behalf of other children and future children in opposition to the bills. Also opposed were representatives of the Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce and the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
In fact, every person who testified Monday *except* for the ringer brought in by Gould and Pearce was opposed to the bills.
Just about the only tactic that Gould et. al. used today that worked was letting Eastman go on and on while keeping dissenters on a strict time limit. By the time many of the opposing witnesses were called to the podium, they had left the meeting due to the late hour.
However, that didn't change the basic math for Gould - out of eight members of the committee, three were clearly going to vote against his measures (Democrats Sinema and Steve Gallardo, and Republican Driggs) and one was wavering (Republican McComish) leaving both dead on a 4 - 4 ties. His "hold" of the bills allows him to both save face and allow him, Pearce, et. al. to twist some arms behind the scenes to wrangle the votes into line or even to pull the bills from that committee and assign it to one with a more pliable membership.
The quote of the day, and possibly highlighting the reason that Gould and company are so scared of immigrants, came from 12-year-old Kathleen Figueroa -
"We are the future."
Some pics -
Ron Gould, and *yes* that is a tea party sticker on his state computer...
Kyrsten Sinema during the discussion
Just a few of the many media representatives watching the hearing
One of Gould's fellow nativists, Rep. John Kavanagh, made a personal appearance to check in on the proceedings
The protest outside the Senate building
Steve Gallardo
Before a packed meeting room, the Judiciary Committee of the Arizona Senate listened to well over two hours of testimony regarding SB1308 and SB1309, the anti-14th Amendment/birthright citizenship bills proposed by Sen. Ron Gould, the committee's chair.
Anybody who watched the proceedings, in person or over the internet, was treated to a mindnumbing showcase of constitutional law knowledge and ignorance.
The lead actor in that part of Monday's political theater was one John Eastman, a law schoo dean from California. Dr. Eastman's biography boasts of his clerkship for US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. He also regularly weighs in on things like torture, school vouchers, expansive Presidential power, and more, always supporting the "conservative" position. In short, he was an out-of-town ringer brought in by Gould and Pearce for just this event.
Eastman droned on for well over 90 minutes, basically arguing that everyone of the "interpretations" of the 14th Amendment over the last 140+ years was wrong and that his "interpretation" was the correct one.
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema served as the main counterpoint to Eastman's misinformation, drawing on her own intelligence and legal knowledge to successfully refute Eastman's arguments. Republican Senator Adam Driggs, a lawyer too, also pushed back against Eastman.
I'm not recounting the discussion in it entirety because it was too long and technical for me to follow closely, but friend of mine who works in the justice system was watching, described Eastman's arguments as erroneous (OK, a different word was used, but in the interests of keeping this post family-friendly... :) ).
The video of the meeting will eventually be posted on the legislature's website here (look for Senate Judiciary on 2/7/2011).
While I can't completely summarize the legal arguments between Sinema and Driggs on one side and Eastman on the other, I can list some of the better quotes of the meeting -
"The bills would have no effect unless the federal government takes steps" - Gould (then why waste the taxpayers' time and resources with this crap)
"I'm the 'Clarence Thomas' of this committee - I don't ask many questions" -Sen. John McComish
The bills "could shame our state" - Jennifer Allen of the Border Action Network
The proposals would "create multiple generations of children without a nation, a community" - Dana Naimark of Childrens Action Alliance
Three children, ages 11 and 12, spoke on behalf of other children and future children in opposition to the bills. Also opposed were representatives of the Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce and the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
In fact, every person who testified Monday *except* for the ringer brought in by Gould and Pearce was opposed to the bills.
Just about the only tactic that Gould et. al. used today that worked was letting Eastman go on and on while keeping dissenters on a strict time limit. By the time many of the opposing witnesses were called to the podium, they had left the meeting due to the late hour.
However, that didn't change the basic math for Gould - out of eight members of the committee, three were clearly going to vote against his measures (Democrats Sinema and Steve Gallardo, and Republican Driggs) and one was wavering (Republican McComish) leaving both dead on a 4 - 4 ties. His "hold" of the bills allows him to both save face and allow him, Pearce, et. al. to twist some arms behind the scenes to wrangle the votes into line or even to pull the bills from that committee and assign it to one with a more pliable membership.
The quote of the day, and possibly highlighting the reason that Gould and company are so scared of immigrants, came from 12-year-old Kathleen Figueroa -
"We are the future."
Some pics -
Ron Gould, and *yes* that is a tea party sticker on his state computer...
Kyrsten Sinema during the discussion
Just a few of the many media representatives watching the hearing
One of Gould's fellow nativists, Rep. John Kavanagh, made a personal appearance to check in on the proceedings
The protest outside the Senate building
Steve Gallardo
AZGOP: Going after the children
Just a quick hit as I'm sitting in the Senate gallery waiting for the floor session to start...
Not only are Arizona's Republicans (in the persons of Senate President Russell Pearce and his accomplices in the lege) going after brown-skinned children with their anti-14th Amendment/birthright citizenship bills (to be heard in Senate Judiciary later today, the real reason I'm down here today), they are working on indoctrinating white-skinned children with their ideology.
When I arrived in the Senate gallery, Sen. Don Shooter was addressing a group of children who were here on a class trip.
One of the children asked "can the Governor tell the President what to do?"
Shooter responded "we'd like that" then went on to explain his view of the relationship between the states and the federal government as one where the state governments are the parents of a wayward child called the federal government and like many parents, sometimes there is a need to bring that child to heel (my paraphrase, not a quote.)
And when asked if he had any friends in the Senate, he answered "only the ones with elephants on their desks.
....On a related-to-the-Senate-Judiciary note:
There was a small protest outside the Senate when I arrived, protesting Russell Pearce and his bigoted agenda. There were perhaps 50-60 protesters, and more than 20 were small children.
There were at least a dozen uniformed police officers (mostly DPS and Capitol PD) flanking the protesters, which is 11 - 12 more than is normally in evidence here, unless there is a LARGE protest (meaning 1000 or more folks.)
Not only are Arizona's Republicans (in the persons of Senate President Russell Pearce and his accomplices in the lege) going after brown-skinned children with their anti-14th Amendment/birthright citizenship bills (to be heard in Senate Judiciary later today, the real reason I'm down here today), they are working on indoctrinating white-skinned children with their ideology.
When I arrived in the Senate gallery, Sen. Don Shooter was addressing a group of children who were here on a class trip.
One of the children asked "can the Governor tell the President what to do?"
Shooter responded "we'd like that" then went on to explain his view of the relationship between the states and the federal government as one where the state governments are the parents of a wayward child called the federal government and like many parents, sometimes there is a need to bring that child to heel (my paraphrase, not a quote.)
And when asked if he had any friends in the Senate, he answered "only the ones with elephants on their desks.
....On a related-to-the-Senate-Judiciary note:
There was a small protest outside the Senate when I arrived, protesting Russell Pearce and his bigoted agenda. There were perhaps 50-60 protesters, and more than 20 were small children.
There were at least a dozen uniformed police officers (mostly DPS and Capitol PD) flanking the protesters, which is 11 - 12 more than is normally in evidence here, unless there is a LARGE protest (meaning 1000 or more folks.)
Sunday, February 06, 2011
The coming week: Legislative Edition. Chapter 2 - Arizona House
As usual, all info gathered from the website of the Arizona Legislature or other internet sources, and subject to change without notice (and given the time of year, expect changes)...
Normally, the committee schedules of both the House and Senate are combined into one post. However, the week, and probably for the next few weeks, committee agendas are incredibly full. In the interests of keeping this manageable, there will be a separate post for each chamber this week and any future weeks where necessary.
In addition, there are *so* many bills up for consideration this week, that I don't have time or space to cover them all. If you've got a particular area of interest, please read the pertinent agenda(s) to ensure you know about all of the bills you care about.
House committee highlights/lowlights this week -
- Rules will meet on Monday in HHR4 at 1 p.m. The agenda is a long one and mostly OK. However, bad or good, this committee is a rubber stamp and the meeting will be a short one.
- Ways and Means will meet on Monday in HHR1 at 2 p.m. On the agenda: a striker to HB2207, micromanaging the purchasing policies of the Maricopa Integrated Health System; HB2338, placing more stringent limits on county-level secondary tax levies (i.e. - library, jail, health care districts); HB2503, reducing the income tax rate for the poor and downtrodden...corporations ($200 million to $250 million per year); HB2504, phasing out the state's capital gains tax ($369,000,000 worth of state revenue in 2008); HB2557, imposing a 300% sales tax on medical marijuana (sponsored mostly by Democrats, not sure how this one will fare. If the Rs on the committee vote for the measure, they'll be supporting a higher tax, if they oppose it, they'll be seen as protecting marijuana. Hmmm.... :) ); HCR2006, drastically raising the tax exemption limit for business personal property.
- Energy and Natural Resources will meet on Monday in HHR4 at 2 p.m. On the agenda: HB2485,
mandating that if a governmental entity acquires previously privately-owned land, it must sell and equal amount (in terms of value) of land it already owns.
- Education will meet on Monday in HHR3 at 2 p.m. or upon recess of the floor session. On the agenda: HB2419, micromanaging schools' employment decisions by mandating that K-8 schools each hire a phonics reading coach that meet certain criteria. Oh, and all costs for this mandate would be covered by the schools. There's another, more technical, bill involving JTEDs (Joint Technical Education Districts) on the agenda, HB2237. Not sure if this is bad, good, or housekeeping.
- Banking and Insurance will meet on Monday in HHR5 at 2 p.m. Looks quiet so far.
- Government will meet on Monday in HHR4 at 2 p.m. On the agenda: HB2077, requiring all federal agencies to register with a county sheriff and pay a fee before conducting any sort of operations in a county;
- Employment and Regulatory Affairs will meet on Tuesday in HHR3 at 2 p.m. No bills on the agenda thus far.
- Military Affairs and Public Safety will meet on Wednesday in HHR3 at 9 a.m. On the agenda: HB2366, mandating that communications with public officials be "anonymized" before the contents of the communications are made part of the public record.
- Higher Education, Innovation, and Reform will meet on Wednesday in HHR2 at 9 a.m. On the agenda: \HB2565, protecting devoutly religious students at the state's universities and community colleges from reality if reality is in conflict with their deeply-held (or not-so-deeply-held) religious beliefs.
- Health and Human Services will meet on Wednesday in HHR4 at 9 a.m. On the agenda: HB2384, an anti-choice measure and HCR2034, "honoring" the faux pregnancy care centers that seek to deceive desperate women looking for accurate and complete information regarding their health care.
- Commerce will meet on Wednesday in HHR5 at 10 a.m. On the agenda: HB2536, removing the requirement that dog racing facilities actually hold dog races, allowing them to go over to simulcast-only operations.
- Appropriations will meet on Wednesday in HHR1 at 2 p.m. Highlight (and perhaps one of the few of the week in either chamber): HB2227, declaring that money given as a gift or bequest to a state agency isn't part of the states's General Fund and cannot be swept and appropriated by the legislature unless such is specifically allowed by the giver.
- Transportation will meet on Thursday in HHR3 at 9 a.m. On the agenda: HB2003, barring public agencies from imposing or collecting any emergency service response fees, with certain exceptions, including ambulance services. Not sure how bad this bill is, but since Rep. John Kavanagh is behind it, it probably targets Mexicans. I just haven't figured out how. :)
- Judiciary will meet on Thursday in HHR4 at 9 a.m. On the agenda: HB2304, an "elections omnibus" bill. Some of the provisions include: requiring that non-resident petition circulators register with the secretary of state's office (though the language is so broad that it might be construed as to require that *all* petition circulators register with the SOS, allowing candidates with an "exploratory" committee to collect signatures and contributions (call this the "Huppenthal Provision"), allow candidates to transfer excess campaign funds to their officeholder expense accounts (not sure how this provision would affect Clean Elections money, of which surplus is supposed to be returned to Clean Elections).
- Agriculture and Water will meet on Thursday in HHR5 at 9 a.m. On the agenda: HB2339, reducing commercial and agricultural property taxes.
Later...
Normally, the committee schedules of both the House and Senate are combined into one post. However, the week, and probably for the next few weeks, committee agendas are incredibly full. In the interests of keeping this manageable, there will be a separate post for each chamber this week and any future weeks where necessary.
In addition, there are *so* many bills up for consideration this week, that I don't have time or space to cover them all. If you've got a particular area of interest, please read the pertinent agenda(s) to ensure you know about all of the bills you care about.
House committee highlights/lowlights this week -
- Rules will meet on Monday in HHR4 at 1 p.m. The agenda is a long one and mostly OK. However, bad or good, this committee is a rubber stamp and the meeting will be a short one.
- Ways and Means will meet on Monday in HHR1 at 2 p.m. On the agenda: a striker to HB2207, micromanaging the purchasing policies of the Maricopa Integrated Health System; HB2338, placing more stringent limits on county-level secondary tax levies (i.e. - library, jail, health care districts); HB2503, reducing the income tax rate for the poor and downtrodden...corporations ($200 million to $250 million per year); HB2504, phasing out the state's capital gains tax ($369,000,000 worth of state revenue in 2008); HB2557, imposing a 300% sales tax on medical marijuana (sponsored mostly by Democrats, not sure how this one will fare. If the Rs on the committee vote for the measure, they'll be supporting a higher tax, if they oppose it, they'll be seen as protecting marijuana. Hmmm.... :) ); HCR2006, drastically raising the tax exemption limit for business personal property.
- Energy and Natural Resources will meet on Monday in HHR4 at 2 p.m. On the agenda: HB2485,
mandating that if a governmental entity acquires previously privately-owned land, it must sell and equal amount (in terms of value) of land it already owns.
- Education will meet on Monday in HHR3 at 2 p.m. or upon recess of the floor session. On the agenda: HB2419, micromanaging schools' employment decisions by mandating that K-8 schools each hire a phonics reading coach that meet certain criteria. Oh, and all costs for this mandate would be covered by the schools. There's another, more technical, bill involving JTEDs (Joint Technical Education Districts) on the agenda, HB2237. Not sure if this is bad, good, or housekeeping.
- Banking and Insurance will meet on Monday in HHR5 at 2 p.m. Looks quiet so far.
- Government will meet on Monday in HHR4 at 2 p.m. On the agenda: HB2077, requiring all federal agencies to register with a county sheriff and pay a fee before conducting any sort of operations in a county;
- Employment and Regulatory Affairs will meet on Tuesday in HHR3 at 2 p.m. No bills on the agenda thus far.
- Military Affairs and Public Safety will meet on Wednesday in HHR3 at 9 a.m. On the agenda: HB2366, mandating that communications with public officials be "anonymized" before the contents of the communications are made part of the public record.
- Higher Education, Innovation, and Reform will meet on Wednesday in HHR2 at 9 a.m. On the agenda: \HB2565, protecting devoutly religious students at the state's universities and community colleges from reality if reality is in conflict with their deeply-held (or not-so-deeply-held) religious beliefs.
- Health and Human Services will meet on Wednesday in HHR4 at 9 a.m. On the agenda: HB2384, an anti-choice measure and HCR2034, "honoring" the faux pregnancy care centers that seek to deceive desperate women looking for accurate and complete information regarding their health care.
- Commerce will meet on Wednesday in HHR5 at 10 a.m. On the agenda: HB2536, removing the requirement that dog racing facilities actually hold dog races, allowing them to go over to simulcast-only operations.
- Appropriations will meet on Wednesday in HHR1 at 2 p.m. Highlight (and perhaps one of the few of the week in either chamber): HB2227, declaring that money given as a gift or bequest to a state agency isn't part of the states's General Fund and cannot be swept and appropriated by the legislature unless such is specifically allowed by the giver.
- Transportation will meet on Thursday in HHR3 at 9 a.m. On the agenda: HB2003, barring public agencies from imposing or collecting any emergency service response fees, with certain exceptions, including ambulance services. Not sure how bad this bill is, but since Rep. John Kavanagh is behind it, it probably targets Mexicans. I just haven't figured out how. :)
- Judiciary will meet on Thursday in HHR4 at 9 a.m. On the agenda: HB2304, an "elections omnibus" bill. Some of the provisions include: requiring that non-resident petition circulators register with the secretary of state's office (though the language is so broad that it might be construed as to require that *all* petition circulators register with the SOS, allowing candidates with an "exploratory" committee to collect signatures and contributions (call this the "Huppenthal Provision"), allow candidates to transfer excess campaign funds to their officeholder expense accounts (not sure how this provision would affect Clean Elections money, of which surplus is supposed to be returned to Clean Elections).
- Agriculture and Water will meet on Thursday in HHR5 at 9 a.m. On the agenda: HB2339, reducing commercial and agricultural property taxes.
Later...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)