...but don't worry, they left us with a couple of parting gifts on their way out the door...
HB2779 - Bars employers from knowingly employing undocumented immigrants and permanently revokes their business licenses for a second offense. This measure was passed because of threats by Rep. Russell Pearce (R-National Alliance) about gathering signatures to put it out to referendum.
The Democrats who objected to it didn't argue about the appropriateness of going after the employers, just that the bill was overly onerous for small businesses.
Even if the Governor signs it, it will be 'fixed' after the first time that Wal Mart or one of the big homebuilders/campaign contributors runs afoul of the law.
Note - 'fixed' equals 'repealed'. The Chamber of Commerce types from both sides of the aisle will just wait until it's too far into next year's election cycle to gather enough signatures to get the measure onto the ballot.
EV Trib coverage here.
SB1222 - Increases the penalties for being in a street gang, including requiring that those convicted of crimes as part of a street gang be placed on lifetime parole.
That parole is reduced to 10 years if certain conditions are met, including if " the conduct of the defendant on parole warrants it. " [God, I just love vague generalities in my laws! Don't you? LOL]
Now this is more like it! After the whole attempt to repeal the requirement for ignition interlock devices for first-time DUI offenders, I was beginning to worry that our lege had lost its edge. But not to worry, the 'law-and-order, shoot first and ask questions later' lege that we all know and love is back.
Note: The attempt to repeal the IID law died with the end of the session of the lege. SB1582 was in a conference committee but no compromise could be worked out. AZ Rep coverage here.
The AZ Rep's Plugged In has coverage of the legislature's final day here.
Later!
Thursday, June 21, 2007
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
So who says that Bush doesn't have a sense of irony?
In the speech that he gave regarding his veto of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, he use the word "ethical" or one of its variations 13 times.
Now if only he would take the same concern for 'ethical' behavior and apply it to the way the he and the White House operates.
And that's not even discussing his rhetorical reverence for the 'sanctity of human life'; the current toll of more than 3500 dead U.S. servicemembers and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians in Bush's continuing war give lie to that 'reverence.'
BTW - CD5's Congressman Harry Mitchell (D-AZ) responded to the veto at a press conference today.
From a press release -
Later!
Now if only he would take the same concern for 'ethical' behavior and apply it to the way the he and the White House operates.
And that's not even discussing his rhetorical reverence for the 'sanctity of human life'; the current toll of more than 3500 dead U.S. servicemembers and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians in Bush's continuing war give lie to that 'reverence.'
BTW - CD5's Congressman Harry Mitchell (D-AZ) responded to the veto at a press conference today.
From a press release -
"I believe the best way we can honor life is by investing in science and ethical research.
Congress rarely gets an opportunity to offer hope to the millions of Americans who suffer from diseases such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, Lou Gehrig's and Huntington's Disease.
A growing majority of the American people, including my constituents in Arizona 's Fifth Congressional District - believe this is an investment we should make.
They support this research because they understand that we have a moral obligation to invest in embryonic stem cell research because it provides the best hope for a cure for these diseases and many others.
They were proud when Congress passed this legislation, and I know they are disappointed by today's veto." said Mitchell.
Later!
BRBs - Conclusion
To summarize the rest of the interesting stuff in the AZ legislature's budget reconciliation bills -
HB2784, Tax Reduction Package - The big one here was language exempting admission to an NBA All-Star Game and related events from the Transaction Privilege Tax (sales tax). The exemption is conditional - the NBA must award a game to Phoenix and Phoenix must also grant an exemption from its municipal TPT before this takes effect.
D17's Rep. Ed Ableser objected strenuously to this provision (though he voted 'yes' on the overall bill), citing the fact that the extremely successful NBA doesn't need it. [I'm sure the screw job that the NBA pulled on the Suns in the playoffs had *nothing* to do with it. :)) ]
Defenders of the exemption cited the fact that it's not a giveaway to the NBA; the money just wouldn't be collected.
Ummm, one of the reasons that any city welcomes this kind of event, with all of the headaches that come with it, is the increased tax revenue.
Why is the legislature messing with that? Could it have anything to do with the fact that with ticket prices for this year's all star game in Las Vegas reaching five digits ($10,000+ !!), the people that will benefit most from the lege's largesse are the kind of people to make large campaign contributions?
HB2785, Budget Procedures - Adds language that "requires an officer in charge of any statewide, county or legislative election to provide for a live video recording of the custody of all ballots located in a counting center and to retain the recording as a public record."
While there may be some hiccups with the implementation of this, the core idea is a good one.
HB2791, Higher Education - In what is possibly the best nugget (new policy slipped into a budget reconciliation bill), this one contains language creating a "Math, Science and Special Education Teacher Student Loan Program."
This is very similar to Rep. David Schapira's Teacher Student Loan Program that was killed by the chair of the House Rules Committee (it was assigned to the committee but never heard).
HB2789, Health and Welfare - I missed something in yesterday's post on this BRB. While HealthCare Group wasn't completely killed, as some Republicans were trying to do, it was capped at the current enrollment. No new employer groups can be accepted into HCG. In addition, a study committee was created to determine whether or not HCG should be killed.
Note to out-of-state readers: HCG is a state-sponsored health plan that provides coverage to employees of small businesses ( <50 employees) that would otherwise go without healthcare insurance.
Most of the other BRBs seem to be pretty clean, though it's very possible (even likely) that I missed something in some of the more arcane language. If you have a few minutes, go to the lege's website and read the bills for yourself.
I should note here that the sources of much of this post, and the previous BRB posts, include:
the language of the bills themselves (available on the lege's website);
the 'fact sheets' prepared by legislative staffers (also on the website); and
the latest 'Farley-gram' (sign up for it. Trust me. :) ).
Whew!
Later!
HB2784, Tax Reduction Package - The big one here was language exempting admission to an NBA All-Star Game and related events from the Transaction Privilege Tax (sales tax). The exemption is conditional - the NBA must award a game to Phoenix and Phoenix must also grant an exemption from its municipal TPT before this takes effect.
D17's Rep. Ed Ableser objected strenuously to this provision (though he voted 'yes' on the overall bill), citing the fact that the extremely successful NBA doesn't need it. [I'm sure the screw job that the NBA pulled on the Suns in the playoffs had *nothing* to do with it. :)) ]
Defenders of the exemption cited the fact that it's not a giveaway to the NBA; the money just wouldn't be collected.
Ummm, one of the reasons that any city welcomes this kind of event, with all of the headaches that come with it, is the increased tax revenue.
Why is the legislature messing with that? Could it have anything to do with the fact that with ticket prices for this year's all star game in Las Vegas reaching five digits ($10,000+ !!), the people that will benefit most from the lege's largesse are the kind of people to make large campaign contributions?
HB2785, Budget Procedures - Adds language that "requires an officer in charge of any statewide, county or legislative election to provide for a live video recording of the custody of all ballots located in a counting center and to retain the recording as a public record."
While there may be some hiccups with the implementation of this, the core idea is a good one.
HB2791, Higher Education - In what is possibly the best nugget (new policy slipped into a budget reconciliation bill), this one contains language creating a "Math, Science and Special Education Teacher Student Loan Program."
This is very similar to Rep. David Schapira's Teacher Student Loan Program that was killed by the chair of the House Rules Committee (it was assigned to the committee but never heard).
HB2789, Health and Welfare - I missed something in yesterday's post on this BRB. While HealthCare Group wasn't completely killed, as some Republicans were trying to do, it was capped at the current enrollment. No new employer groups can be accepted into HCG. In addition, a study committee was created to determine whether or not HCG should be killed.
Note to out-of-state readers: HCG is a state-sponsored health plan that provides coverage to employees of small businesses ( <50 employees) that would otherwise go without healthcare insurance.
Most of the other BRBs seem to be pretty clean, though it's very possible (even likely) that I missed something in some of the more arcane language. If you have a few minutes, go to the lege's website and read the bills for yourself.
I should note here that the sources of much of this post, and the previous BRB posts, include:
the language of the bills themselves (available on the lege's website);
the 'fact sheets' prepared by legislative staffers (also on the website); and
the latest 'Farley-gram' (sign up for it. Trust me. :) ).
Whew!
Later!
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Short Attention Span Musing
Takin' a break from 'budget mania'... :)
...Why don't they just move the Pentagon itself to Baghdad?
From AP, via Yahoo! News -
Other options mentioned in the article include heavier use of National Guard and/or Reserve units.
An option not discussed in the article was the Congressional Democrats growing a spine and de-authorizing and de-funding Bush's war.
...The exodus of rats off the sinking ship is accelerating...
Also from AP via Yahoo! News -
At least Bloomberg wasn't always a Republican; Portman's a Beltway lifer with serious ties to the Bush family. His departure from the administration is far more significant.
...The list of future Bush pardons looks to be growing...
From the Washington Post -
From AP via the Houston Chronicle -
At this point, when the Bush pardons are listed, it might just be easier to list the Republicans that he *isn't* pardoning, if only to save a few thousand acres of trees.
...And in a moment of wiseass-free blogging, my condolences go out to the families, friends, and colleagues of the 9 Charleston, South Carolina firefighters who died fighting a blaze in a furniture store.
Rest in peace Capt. William "Billy" Hutchinson, 48; Capt. Mike Benke, 49; Capt. Louis Mulkey, 34; Mark Kelsey, 40; Bradford "Brad" Baity, 37; Michael French, 27; James "Earl" Drayton, 56; Brandon Thompson, 27; and Melvin Champaign, 46. (List of victims courtesy AP via the Houston Chronicle)
I'll finish up the budget posts tomorrow.
Good night...
...Why don't they just move the Pentagon itself to Baghdad?
From AP, via Yahoo! News -
Army again considers longer combat tours
WASHINGTON - The Army is considering whether it will have to extend the combat tours of troops in Iraq if President Bush opts to maintain the recent buildup of forces through spring 2008.
{snip}
Most soldiers spend 15 months in combat with a guaranteed 12 months home, a rotation plan that has infuriated Democrats because it exceeds the service's goal of giving troops equal time home as in combat. In coming weeks, the Senate will vote on a proposal by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., that would restrict deployments.
Other options mentioned in the article include heavier use of National Guard and/or Reserve units.
An option not discussed in the article was the Congressional Democrats growing a spine and de-authorizing and de-funding Bush's war.
...The exodus of rats off the sinking ship is accelerating...
Also from AP via Yahoo! News -
NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg leaves GOP
NEW YORK - New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg on Tuesday switched his party status from Republican to unaffiliated, a stunning move certain to be seen as a prelude to an independent presidential bid that would upend the 2008 race.
White House budget director resigns
WASHINGTON - White House budget director Rob Portman announced his resignation Tuesday, joining a lengthening list of senior officials heading for the exits in the final 1 1/2 years of President Bush's administration.
At least Bloomberg wasn't always a Republican; Portman's a Beltway lifer with serious ties to the Bush family. His departure from the administration is far more significant.
...The list of future Bush pardons looks to be growing...
From the Washington Post -
One Giuliani Backer Is a Bust
When South Carolina's treasurer, Thomas Ravenel, endorsed former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani for president in April, he heaped praise on Giuliani for reducing crime, saying that "the mayor rescued New York City from the cesspool that it was."
So Giuliani must have grimaced yesterday when a grand jury in South Carolina indicted Ravenel on charges of conspiracy to distribute cocaine.
From AP via the Houston Chronicle -
Sen. Stevens aides questioned in probe
WASHINGTON — Former Capitol Hill aides to Sen. Ted Stevens are being questioned by the FBI as part of an investigation into the senator's relationship with a wealthy contractor.
{snip}
[Bill] Allen is the founder of VECO Corp., an Alaska-based oil field services and engineering company that has had tens of millions of dollars worth of federal contracts. Allen also oversaw renovations on Stevens' home in 2000, according to carpenters who worked on the house.
The FBI is looking closely at that project, which more than doubled the size of Stevens' home in the ski resort community of Girdwood, about 40 miles south of Anchorage. As recently as two weeks ago, FBI agent Randy Wolverton requested planning records pertaining to the renovation, according to city documents.
At this point, when the Bush pardons are listed, it might just be easier to list the Republicans that he *isn't* pardoning, if only to save a few thousand acres of trees.
...And in a moment of wiseass-free blogging, my condolences go out to the families, friends, and colleagues of the 9 Charleston, South Carolina firefighters who died fighting a blaze in a furniture store.
Rest in peace Capt. William "Billy" Hutchinson, 48; Capt. Mike Benke, 49; Capt. Louis Mulkey, 34; Mark Kelsey, 40; Bradford "Brad" Baity, 37; Michael French, 27; James "Earl" Drayton, 56; Brandon Thompson, 27; and Melvin Champaign, 46. (List of victims courtesy AP via the Houston Chronicle)
I'll finish up the budget posts tomorrow.
Good night...
BRB - Criminal Justice
This one, HB2787, contains a particularly rancid bit of ugliness.
The bill includes language that would require anybody who is arrested for any reason to submit a DNA sample to be included in the state's DNA profile database. Not only that, but it makes failure to submit a sample a violation of bail. Lastly, in the event that charges are dropped or the defendant is acquitted, it places the burden of petitioning the state to remove their DNA profile from the database on the exonerated defendant.
Contrast this with the lege's zeal at repealing the ignition interlock device provisions of the law for those convicted of DUI.
Am I the only one who sees the disconnect here?
I don't know who slipped the language into the bill, but they should be hanging their heads in shame right about now.
I have a suggestion for the lege the next time they come up with some legislation that they think is so wonderful - replace the name of whatever group they are targeting with the phrase "any person who holds elective office."
If the new language then is something that they are uncomfortable with, maybe they should reconsider foisting it off on the rest of us.
Anyway, kudos to the two Democrats who voted against this bill, Reps. Kyrsten Sinema and Tom Prezelski.
Not to be lost in the stench of the DNA provision is the the part of the bill that continues the never-ending quest by the Republicans to incarcerate society and to privatize that incarceration.
The language calls for the construction of facilities for 6000 more prison beds. In addition, it mandates that a full third of those beds be controlled by private, for profit, imprisonment vendors.
Ugh.
Yup, with nothing really good to balance the badness, this BRB is definitely the worst of the bunch.
More later...
The bill includes language that would require anybody who is arrested for any reason to submit a DNA sample to be included in the state's DNA profile database. Not only that, but it makes failure to submit a sample a violation of bail. Lastly, in the event that charges are dropped or the defendant is acquitted, it places the burden of petitioning the state to remove their DNA profile from the database on the exonerated defendant.
Contrast this with the lege's zeal at repealing the ignition interlock device provisions of the law for those convicted of DUI.
Am I the only one who sees the disconnect here?
I don't know who slipped the language into the bill, but they should be hanging their heads in shame right about now.
I have a suggestion for the lege the next time they come up with some legislation that they think is so wonderful - replace the name of whatever group they are targeting with the phrase "any person who holds elective office."
If the new language then is something that they are uncomfortable with, maybe they should reconsider foisting it off on the rest of us.
Anyway, kudos to the two Democrats who voted against this bill, Reps. Kyrsten Sinema and Tom Prezelski.
Not to be lost in the stench of the DNA provision is the the part of the bill that continues the never-ending quest by the Republicans to incarcerate society and to privatize that incarceration.
The language calls for the construction of facilities for 6000 more prison beds. In addition, it mandates that a full third of those beds be controlled by private, for profit, imprisonment vendors.
Ugh.
Yup, with nothing really good to balance the badness, this BRB is definitely the worst of the bunch.
More later...
BRB - Health and Welfare
HB2789 - Health and Welfare Budget Reconciliation
Bad –
In a curious move, the BRB removes language that defines a 'small' business (“...employed two but not more than twenty-five persons...”) and replaces it with a definition of an 'uninsured small' business (“...a small employer that did not provide a health benefits plan for at least six consecutive months...”).
Potentially very ugly -
The bill includes the following language regarding autism services:
Now that's how you put in language favoring specific companies! :))
Good -
The BRB removes a 'gag' rule that prevented schools from advising possibly eligible residents of the existence of programs such as AHCCCS.
Not sure -
There were a couple of sections, such as those relating insurer data reporting requirements, that caused my eyes to glaze over. I have no idea if these sections are bad or good. I couldn't stay awake long enough for the meaning of the words to reach my brain. :)
Perhaps another blogger, one that is used to reading densely written legalese (are you reading this Michael of Blog for Arizona? LOL), could take the time to go through some of the sections to see if there is anything particularly repugnant hidden in them.
More coming...
Bad –
In a curious move, the BRB removes language that defines a 'small' business (“...employed two but not more than twenty-five persons...”) and replaces it with a definition of an 'uninsured small' business (“...a small employer that did not provide a health benefits plan for at least six consecutive months...”).
Potentially very ugly -
The bill includes the following language regarding autism services:
1. An established firm that specializes in autism services and related disorders and that employs at least five nationally board certified behavior analysts, one of whom is a state-licensed psychologist. The contract shall be for services that are for children who begin treatment before they reach five years of age and that utilize techniques of discrete trial and natural environment intensive behavioral treatment through applied behavioral analysis.
2. An autism and research firm that is based in this state and that has raised at least fifteen million dollars of private sector monies. The contract shall be for providing toddlers with autism services that utilize intensive early intervention.
Now that's how you put in language favoring specific companies! :))
Good -
The BRB removes a 'gag' rule that prevented schools from advising possibly eligible residents of the existence of programs such as AHCCCS.
Not sure -
There were a couple of sections, such as those relating insurer data reporting requirements, that caused my eyes to glaze over. I have no idea if these sections are bad or good. I couldn't stay awake long enough for the meaning of the words to reach my brain. :)
Perhaps another blogger, one that is used to reading densely written legalese (are you reading this Michael of Blog for Arizona? LOL), could take the time to go through some of the sections to see if there is anything particularly repugnant hidden in them.
More coming...
It passed...
The House has passed HB2781, the general appropriations bill for 2007-2008, by a vote of 38 - 21.
Every 'no' vote was by a Republican, and it seemed like each and every one of them stood and bemoaned that the budget
A. did not cut taxes enough.
B. did not adequately increase enforcement activity against illegal immigrants.
C. dd not reflect proper Republican 'values.'
D. treated the House itself disrespectfully.
There were variations in the words used, but not the overall theme.
One thing that I found curious was the way that some Republican members didn't understand the utter hypocrisy of whining about a budget process that didn't "include" them enough while lauding the *Republican* budget originally floated by the House leadership.
As usual for them, Democrats need not apply.
Consideration of the various BRBs and other budget-related bills is ongoing. Passage of all of the bills is expected.
More on this later...
Every 'no' vote was by a Republican, and it seemed like each and every one of them stood and bemoaned that the budget
A. did not cut taxes enough.
B. did not adequately increase enforcement activity against illegal immigrants.
C. dd not reflect proper Republican 'values.'
D. treated the House itself disrespectfully.
There were variations in the words used, but not the overall theme.
One thing that I found curious was the way that some Republican members didn't understand the utter hypocrisy of whining about a budget process that didn't "include" them enough while lauding the *Republican* budget originally floated by the House leadership.
As usual for them, Democrats need not apply.
Consideration of the various BRBs and other budget-related bills is ongoing. Passage of all of the bills is expected.
More on this later...
The budget's in the home stretch...
...and the end of this year's legislative session is in sight...
Well, it looks like the lege is finally going to pass a budget within the next day or so.
Yesterday, the Senate amended and passed a number of budget-related bills and transmitted them to the House. Earlier today, the House Democratic and Republican caucuses heard the bills, clearing the way for floor action.
Today and tomorrow, I plan to do a series of posts addressing some of the nuggets of ugly (and good, where they exist) in the various budget reconciliation bills (BRBs).
First up - HB2790, K-12 Education BRB
Ugly -
A section that requires that someone applying for or renewing a teaching certificate submit an identity-verified fingerprint card and, even though it is a condition of employment, pay for the processing of the card and its related paperwork themselves.
Oh yeah – in a jab at teachers at public and publicly-chartered schools, nothing in the language in the section applies to private schools.
Not sure if this is ugly or good -
A section that creates “an instructional technology pilot program” to upgrade classroom academic technology in one school district TBD.
The reason that I'm unsure about this is that I seem to recall that a similar proposal was floated as an independent bill earlier in the session. One of the arguments raised against that proposal was that it was worded in such a way that there was only one vendor who could supply all of the needed equipment and software. In other words, it was a 'sweetheart' bill.
I don't see that the BRB language has anything that specifies how the money would be spent, so this section might actually be good, or at least harmless.
Good -
There is a section establishing a math or science achievement program. “The purpose of the program is to promote improved pupil achievement in mathematics or science by providing supplemental funding for innovative mathematics or science programs.”
Actually, pending the creation of standards and criteria for the program by the State Board of Ed, this could be really good.
More later!
Well, it looks like the lege is finally going to pass a budget within the next day or so.
Yesterday, the Senate amended and passed a number of budget-related bills and transmitted them to the House. Earlier today, the House Democratic and Republican caucuses heard the bills, clearing the way for floor action.
Today and tomorrow, I plan to do a series of posts addressing some of the nuggets of ugly (and good, where they exist) in the various budget reconciliation bills (BRBs).
First up - HB2790, K-12 Education BRB
Ugly -
A section that requires that someone applying for or renewing a teaching certificate submit an identity-verified fingerprint card and, even though it is a condition of employment, pay for the processing of the card and its related paperwork themselves.
Oh yeah – in a jab at teachers at public and publicly-chartered schools, nothing in the language in the section applies to private schools.
Not sure if this is ugly or good -
A section that creates “an instructional technology pilot program” to upgrade classroom academic technology in one school district TBD.
The reason that I'm unsure about this is that I seem to recall that a similar proposal was floated as an independent bill earlier in the session. One of the arguments raised against that proposal was that it was worded in such a way that there was only one vendor who could supply all of the needed equipment and software. In other words, it was a 'sweetheart' bill.
I don't see that the BRB language has anything that specifies how the money would be spent, so this section might actually be good, or at least harmless.
Good -
There is a section establishing a math or science achievement program. “The purpose of the program is to promote improved pupil achievement in mathematics or science by providing supplemental funding for innovative mathematics or science programs.”
Actually, pending the creation of standards and criteria for the program by the State Board of Ed, this could be really good.
More later!
Monday, June 18, 2007
Upcoming events - (mostly) movie edition
Thursday, June 21 - Special charity screening of "Serenity"
The Arizona Browncoats with Harkins Theatres and The Loft Cinema present a screening of Joss Whedon's movie based on the 'Firefly' series. Portions of the proceeds benefit local charities GIFT (Growth Improvement for Female Teens) and The Women's Foundation of Southern Arizona.
7 p.m. at Harkins Centerpoint 11, 730 South Mill Avenue, Tempe, Arizona 85281
Doors open at 6pm
Tickets on-sale at all Arizona Bookmans locations and are $10 a piece, $12 at the door.
Friday, June 22 - The LD17 Democrats present the acclaimed documentary "The War Tapes" at the Escalante Center in Tempe. Free admission. 6:30 p.m. Contact LD17 chair Doug Mings at dougmings[at]gmail.com for more info.
Monday, June 25 - The Arizona Democratic Party's Heritage Dinner
This year's dinner will feature former president Bill Clinton as the keynote speaker and music star Cece Peniston performing the National Anthem.
The dinner will be at the Phoenician, 6000 E. Camelback, Scottsdale.
For ticket info, contact Maritza Lopez at 602-234-6814
Thursday, June 28 - Fundraiser for MCDP: Preview of Michael Moore’s “Sicko”
The Maricopa County Democratic Party is providing a preview of Michael Moore’s “Sicko” at 7:30 p.m. at the Arizona Mills Harkins Theatre. Cost is $35. For more information, see http://www.maricopademocrat.com/.
The Arizona Browncoats with Harkins Theatres and The Loft Cinema present a screening of Joss Whedon's movie based on the 'Firefly' series. Portions of the proceeds benefit local charities GIFT (Growth Improvement for Female Teens) and The Women's Foundation of Southern Arizona.
7 p.m. at Harkins Centerpoint 11, 730 South Mill Avenue, Tempe, Arizona 85281
Doors open at 6pm
Tickets on-sale at all Arizona Bookmans locations and are $10 a piece, $12 at the door.
Friday, June 22 - The LD17 Democrats present the acclaimed documentary "The War Tapes" at the Escalante Center in Tempe. Free admission. 6:30 p.m. Contact LD17 chair Doug Mings at dougmings[at]gmail.com for more info.
Monday, June 25 - The Arizona Democratic Party's Heritage Dinner
This year's dinner will feature former president Bill Clinton as the keynote speaker and music star Cece Peniston performing the National Anthem.
The dinner will be at the Phoenician, 6000 E. Camelback, Scottsdale.
For ticket info, contact Maritza Lopez at 602-234-6814
Thursday, June 28 - Fundraiser for MCDP: Preview of Michael Moore’s “Sicko”
The Maricopa County Democratic Party is providing a preview of Michael Moore’s “Sicko” at 7:30 p.m. at the Arizona Mills Harkins Theatre. Cost is $35. For more information, see http://www.maricopademocrat.com/.
A first for me - a letter to the Governor
This letter concerned the ongoing efforts by Rep. John Kavanagh and others to repeal the ignition interlock device statute, written by Rep. David Schapira, that was recently signed into law.
The letter -
AZ Rep columnist Laurie Roberts weighs in on the issue, stating that liquor industry representatives have been lobbying hard against IIDs.
I strongly urge anyone else who is interested to contact the Governor and express your opinion.
Her contact info:
The Honorable Janet Napolitano
Governor of Arizona
1700 West Washington
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Telephone (602) 542-4331
Toll Free 1-(800) 253-0883
Fax (602) 542-1381
The contact page on her website can be found here.
Later!
The letter -
There are a number of people who, like me, have been struck by the incongruity of a law-and-order Republican like Kavanagh pushing this repeal.Dear Governor,
I am writing to urge you to veto SB1582, the bill that as amended, would repeal the recently enacted law requiring that first-time DUI offenders have an ignition interlock device (IID) installed in their vehicles.Some of the supporters of the repeal of the law, such as Rep. John Kavanagh, argued that there is no evidence that IIDs prevent first-time offenders from using their vehicles.
While that particular point is debatable, I have to ask, with all due respect to Rep. Kavanagh, how often does this legislature pass a law creating a punishment for a violation of a law without having hard evidence that the punishment will have the intended effect? Witness the vast majority of immigration-related measures passed by the Arizona legislature in recent years.
Others, such as Rep. Ben Miranda, argued that the IIDs would financially impact the families of the offenders.
Perhaps so, but an IID has less of an impact than a term in jail, and it has nowhere near the impact that is experienced by the victims of a drunk driver, even if it was the very first time the driver operated their vehicle while under the influence.
In short, the IID law is a reasonable and measured law. It doesn’t try to prevent people from drinking, or take an overly punitive but ultimately irrelevant action against the offender.
Instead, it addresses the crime directly – get convicted of driving while under the influence, and society will take steps to ensure that you cannot drive while under the influence.
Is the new law perfect?
Almost certainly not (no law is), but it deserves a chance. Let the law work for the remainder of the year. Then, if there are flaws, the next session of the Legislature can fine tune or repeal the law if necessary.
If SB1582 actually makes it to your desk, it deserves your veto.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
AZ Rep columnist Laurie Roberts weighs in on the issue, stating that liquor industry representatives have been lobbying hard against IIDs.
I strongly urge anyone else who is interested to contact the Governor and express your opinion.
Her contact info:
The Honorable Janet Napolitano
Governor of Arizona
1700 West Washington
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Telephone (602) 542-4331
Toll Free 1-(800) 253-0883
Fax (602) 542-1381
The contact page on her website can be found here.
Later!
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Yes Virginia, there is a city government more dysfunctional than Scottsdale's
Surprisingly enough (there's hint if there ever was one :) ), it's not even Mesa.
Just follow Loop 101 westbound to Bell Road west of Arrowhead, then exit and head west a few miles...
From the AZ Rep -
Apparently, the auto allowances have been a recurring issue for some residents.
From a March 2007 AZ Rep article -
The city attorney said that the allowances are an internal administrative issue and not subject to petition or public vote.
Generally speaking, IRS rules require that mileage be documented; however, that's an issue to be worked out between the IRS, Surprise council members, and their personal accountants.
Anyway, if the City Manager's allegation can be proven, those council members have risked jail time for a few more dollars to pay for driving around their districts. I don't think that even The Scottsdale Activist or its contributors has ever accused the members of the Scottsdale City Council of being for sale at a discount price.
BTW - $480 per month?!? That's a LOT of driving in relatively small districts. With a mayor and 6 councilors, that's more than $40K per year. A small fleet of City-owned golf carts (8 - 10) would pay for itself in 2 years and it would have the added benefit of letting the council members blend in with their constituents (hey - drive through Surprise, especially the Sun City Grand area. Trust me on this. :) )
You'd think that a city council comprised of Republicans would be more fiscally responsible.
Have a great weekend!
Just follow Loop 101 westbound to Bell Road west of Arrowhead, then exit and head west a few miles...
From the AZ Rep -
Surprise City Manager Jim Rumpeltes dropped a bombshell at the Surprise City Council meeting Thursday night, saying council members threatened to fire him if he didn't give them fatter auto stipends.
{snip}
Rumpletes accused council members of pressuring him to improperly fire top city staff in violation of the city code. He singled Councilman Joe Johnson out by name.
"When staff is negotiating with outside parties, it is common for some council members to have independent meetings without staff's knowledge," Rumpeltes said. "Polling of each other and lining up votes in advance is a common practice for some. Threats and coercion are also common for some."
"I learned of that with the renewal of my last contract," Rumpeltes said. "While my mother was dying, I was told (by council members), 'Give us a large auto allowance or you're gone'."
Apparently, the auto allowances have been a recurring issue for some residents.
From a March 2007 AZ Rep article -
The Surprise city attorney has rejected more than 1,500 petition signatures a resident gathered in hopes of forcing all City Council members to record their auto mileage rather than receive a flat stipend.
The city attorney said that the allowances are an internal administrative issue and not subject to petition or public vote.
Generally speaking, IRS rules require that mileage be documented; however, that's an issue to be worked out between the IRS, Surprise council members, and their personal accountants.
Anyway, if the City Manager's allegation can be proven, those council members have risked jail time for a few more dollars to pay for driving around their districts. I don't think that even The Scottsdale Activist or its contributors has ever accused the members of the Scottsdale City Council of being for sale at a discount price.
BTW - $480 per month?!? That's a LOT of driving in relatively small districts. With a mayor and 6 councilors, that's more than $40K per year. A small fleet of City-owned golf carts (8 - 10) would pay for itself in 2 years and it would have the added benefit of letting the council members blend in with their constituents (hey - drive through Surprise, especially the Sun City Grand area. Trust me on this. :) )
You'd think that a city council comprised of Republicans would be more fiscally responsible.
Have a great weekend!
Budget deal reached?
It's not a 'done deal' yet (and won't be until the final vote is tallied), but according to Rep. Phil Lopes during today's meeting of the House Democratic Caucus, the budget is all but done and the legislative session should end next week, probably on Tuesday or Wednesday.
When the individual budget bills are posted on the lege's website, I'll try to go through them and see what bits of ugliness slipped through (keep your eyes on Healthcare Group, folks).
Later!
When the individual budget bills are posted on the lege's website, I'll try to go through them and see what bits of ugliness slipped through (keep your eyes on Healthcare Group, folks).
Later!
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
The 'law and order' lege backpedaling on tougher DUI law
Earlier in the session, Rep. David Schapira (D-LD17) accomplished something unusual for a Democrat in the Arizona State Legislature -
An amendment that he proposed was added by the House to a bill, which later passed the Senate also and was signed into law by Governor Napolitano.
The amendment, now law, requires that first-time DUI offenders install an ignition interlock device (IID) into their vehicles and that they pass a breath test before their cars will start.
The new law gives Arizona some of the strongest anti-DUI laws in the nation, yet it was done in a reasonable, non-"lock-'em up and throw away the key" way.
Coming from the AZ lege, that's almost unheard of.
Rest assured, however, that the lege's bout of sanity and reason was short-lived, though it ended in a rather surprising manner.
The House, led by a Republican ex-police officer, is trying to weaken the law.
Yesterday, LD8 Rep. John Kavanagh (R-Scottsdale) proposed, and the House passed, an amendment to another bill, SB1582, gutting the new law. Kavanagh's amendment would require IIDs for first time DUI offenders only if they cause an accident with injuries or property damage.
Now, when I first heard about the move by Kavanagh, the partisan hack in me immediately started thinking "Damn! The Republicans won't let a Democrat get anything passed, and if one does, they're so blindly partisan, they'll try to repeal it."
Then the cynic in me chimed in.
The new law is a general one; it applies to all DUI offenders.
It will apply even to the moneyed denizens of Kavanagh's district in north Scottsdale and Fountain Hills.
Could it be that Rep. Kavanagh, a hardcore 'law and order' Republican, realized that this law could apply to 'good people' and their families and rode to the rescue?
I've got a sneaking suspicion that if the original law was targeted only at immigrants, Kavanagh would be trying to make it tougher, not weaker.
Note1: There is some question about whether yesterday's vote will make a bit of difference. The amended bill still has to go back to the Senate, where the original sponsor of it, Sen. Linda Gray (R-LD10), has said that she doesn't approve of the change. If they get that worked out, it still has to be signed by the Governor.
In other words, Kavanagh still has an uphill battle on this.
On the other hand, his LD8 counterpart in the Senate, Sen. Carolyn Allen, is well respected and influential. If she's on board and can convince Linda Gray, it might make it through conference committee.
Stay tuned.
Note2: There are some concerns over the original bill, witnessed by the fact that a number of Democrats supported the amendment. Simply put though, Kavanagh and his amendment would have more credibility if one of them had actually proposed the amendment in the first place.
A number of the representatives expressed concerns about the impact of the IID provision in the new law on women, motorcyclists, and families of DUI offenders.
To them I say: Whatever the impact, it sure beats jail time.
AZ Rep coverage is here.
EV Trib coverage here.
Later!
An amendment that he proposed was added by the House to a bill, which later passed the Senate also and was signed into law by Governor Napolitano.
The amendment, now law, requires that first-time DUI offenders install an ignition interlock device (IID) into their vehicles and that they pass a breath test before their cars will start.
The new law gives Arizona some of the strongest anti-DUI laws in the nation, yet it was done in a reasonable, non-"lock-'em up and throw away the key" way.
Coming from the AZ lege, that's almost unheard of.
Rest assured, however, that the lege's bout of sanity and reason was short-lived, though it ended in a rather surprising manner.
The House, led by a Republican ex-police officer, is trying to weaken the law.
Yesterday, LD8 Rep. John Kavanagh (R-Scottsdale) proposed, and the House passed, an amendment to another bill, SB1582, gutting the new law. Kavanagh's amendment would require IIDs for first time DUI offenders only if they cause an accident with injuries or property damage.
Now, when I first heard about the move by Kavanagh, the partisan hack in me immediately started thinking "Damn! The Republicans won't let a Democrat get anything passed, and if one does, they're so blindly partisan, they'll try to repeal it."
Then the cynic in me chimed in.
The new law is a general one; it applies to all DUI offenders.
It will apply even to the moneyed denizens of Kavanagh's district in north Scottsdale and Fountain Hills.
Could it be that Rep. Kavanagh, a hardcore 'law and order' Republican, realized that this law could apply to 'good people' and their families and rode to the rescue?
I've got a sneaking suspicion that if the original law was targeted only at immigrants, Kavanagh would be trying to make it tougher, not weaker.
Note1: There is some question about whether yesterday's vote will make a bit of difference. The amended bill still has to go back to the Senate, where the original sponsor of it, Sen. Linda Gray (R-LD10), has said that she doesn't approve of the change. If they get that worked out, it still has to be signed by the Governor.
In other words, Kavanagh still has an uphill battle on this.
On the other hand, his LD8 counterpart in the Senate, Sen. Carolyn Allen, is well respected and influential. If she's on board and can convince Linda Gray, it might make it through conference committee.
Stay tuned.
Note2: There are some concerns over the original bill, witnessed by the fact that a number of Democrats supported the amendment. Simply put though, Kavanagh and his amendment would have more credibility if one of them had actually proposed the amendment in the first place.
A number of the representatives expressed concerns about the impact of the IID provision in the new law on women, motorcyclists, and families of DUI offenders.
To them I say: Whatever the impact, it sure beats jail time.
AZ Rep coverage is here.
EV Trib coverage here.
Later!
The People, the State, and even the Republic itself are a little safer today...
...for today on the floor of the Arizona Senate, Sen. Jack Harper (R-Surprise!) announced that he is leaving for a vacation tomorrow.
Now, if only he could take Jim Weiers and the House Republican leadership with him; maybe then the lege could pass a halfway decent budget and end the session.
[What can I say? It's been too long since my last 'pick on Jack Harper' post. I just couldn't resist this one. :) ]
Now, if only he could take Jim Weiers and the House Republican leadership with him; maybe then the lege could pass a halfway decent budget and end the session.
[What can I say? It's been too long since my last 'pick on Jack Harper' post. I just couldn't resist this one. :) ]
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Republicans are the same all over...
...whether in DC or AZ.
When all is said and done, whether the issue is defense or immigration or 'law and order' or whatever, they're nothing but hypocrites.
In rhetoric, they call themselves the 'party of fiscal responsibility'; in reality, they have absolutely no interest in acting in a fiscally responsible manner.
...Here in sunny, and dusty, Arizona, House Speaker Jim Weiers (R-Loan Shark) is so adamant that he get his draconian budget passed that budget negotiations with the Senate and Governor have all but ground to a halt. The State Senate has even adjourned until Thursday because they don't think anything is going to get done this week. Not too sure about next week, either.
Did I mention that the fiscal year ends in 2 1/2 weeks? State government shuts down in 19 days; that may make Ron Gould happy, but most sane people (yes, even the sane Republicans) realize that isn't a good thing for the people of Arizona.
...In cloudy and humid DC, during consideration of HR2638, Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2008, the Congressional Republicans are using the dilatory tactic of repeatedly moving that 'the committee rise', ending consideration of the bill today. They are allegedly protesting the earmark process associated with the bill.
They are forcing the House to stop functioning until they get their way.
One of the frequent points that the Reps have raised during the debate is how open their own earmark process was in last year's budget.
What they haven't said, however, is that they didn't actually pass a budget last year. It took a series of continuing resolutions (CRs) passed earlier this year by the new Democratic majority, to actually keep things like DHS (and DoD, and the rest of the government) funded for this fiscal year.
As with last year, while they are loudly beating their own chests, proclaiming themselves to be the 'fiscally responsible' ones, they are quietly acting in a manner to undermine fiscal prudence.
Much like their Arizona brethren, scoring partisan points is more important to them than actually doing their jobs.
When all is said and done, whether the issue is defense or immigration or 'law and order' or whatever, they're nothing but hypocrites.
In rhetoric, they call themselves the 'party of fiscal responsibility'; in reality, they have absolutely no interest in acting in a fiscally responsible manner.
...Here in sunny, and dusty, Arizona, House Speaker Jim Weiers (R-Loan Shark) is so adamant that he get his draconian budget passed that budget negotiations with the Senate and Governor have all but ground to a halt. The State Senate has even adjourned until Thursday because they don't think anything is going to get done this week. Not too sure about next week, either.
Did I mention that the fiscal year ends in 2 1/2 weeks? State government shuts down in 19 days; that may make Ron Gould happy, but most sane people (yes, even the sane Republicans) realize that isn't a good thing for the people of Arizona.
...In cloudy and humid DC, during consideration of HR2638, Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2008, the Congressional Republicans are using the dilatory tactic of repeatedly moving that 'the committee rise', ending consideration of the bill today. They are allegedly protesting the earmark process associated with the bill.
They are forcing the House to stop functioning until they get their way.
One of the frequent points that the Reps have raised during the debate is how open their own earmark process was in last year's budget.
What they haven't said, however, is that they didn't actually pass a budget last year. It took a series of continuing resolutions (CRs) passed earlier this year by the new Democratic majority, to actually keep things like DHS (and DoD, and the rest of the government) funded for this fiscal year.
As with last year, while they are loudly beating their own chests, proclaiming themselves to be the 'fiscally responsible' ones, they are quietly acting in a manner to undermine fiscal prudence.
Much like their Arizona brethren, scoring partisan points is more important to them than actually doing their jobs.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)