Besides today's ruling from the AZ Supreme Court saying that the lege should send the governor the budget bills that they've passed, but refusing to actually order the lege to do so, a number of other officials in the state are avoiding the dogfight on west Washington like the governor and legislature have leprosy.
The Governor has released a list of supporters of her budget. While that list is a long one, filled with names from all over the state, those names all have one thing in common.
None of them, even the elected officials, can be said to have much of a future in elected politics.
There are a number of chamber of commerce/business types, as well as mayors and city/town council members, but few of those names are recognizable outside of their bailiwicks.
That's not meant to be an insult to any of those luminaries, but when the biggest names on the list are folks like Mayors Elaine Scruggs (Glendale), Bob Walkup (Tucson), Mark Nexsen (Lake Havasu) and Doug Von Gausig (Clarkdale), it makes people wonder where the "big" names are.
Neither Walkup nor Scruggs, fairly well-respected in their areas, has shown interest in higher office. As for Nexsen, Von Guasig and most of the others on the Governor's list, well, Lake Havasu, Clarkdale and the hinterlands of the state aren't necessarily the best locales from which to launch a bid for statewide or federal office.
So where are the (relatively) young up and comers?
Why are they so silent?
Since I'm not exactly a close personal friend with any such local officials (most of them are Republicans, not the sort of folks I tend to hang out with :) ), I can only speculate.
That speculation?
Politics. (Yeah, that's hardly a surprising insight in a political blog :) )
Actually, practical politics.
For instance, some folks have speculated about the absence of any support from the Mayor or City Council of Mesa.
The simple fact is that the most influential politicians in Mesa aren't the Mayor or on the City Council. They're in the lege, and in the persons of Russell Pearce, Kirk Adams, and Chuck Gray, are leading the quest to shut down the state government. The municipal officials in Mesa may be uncomfortable with the actions and goals of the legislature and their potential impact on the city, but it's difficult for any elected official to buck a machine.
Other folks have questioned the absence of Hugh Hallman and the Tempe City Council from the Governor's list.
That one is even simpler - a majority of the members of the Tempe City Council are Democrats and have no desire to pick sides in what has become a Republican civil war. In addition, Republican Mayor Hugh Hallman wants Jan Brewer's job; he's not going to public support anything she does between now and next year's elections.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
One week left to a shutdown...do we have a plan B?
...Let's see - the only budget that the lege has even considered is their own draconian one, they've refused to send even that to the governor for her signature/veto, and the AZ Supreme Court has taken one look at the mess that the other two branches of state government have created and fled screaming into the deep desert, hoping to hide until the dust* storm passes.
*In this context, "dust" is a euphemism for "bovine-based solid biological waste matter," a phrase that is itself a euphemism. :)
So, in the event that the Republican caucus of the lege and their governor (their edict is that no Democrats are allowed to participate in this exercise) choose to keep their rectums firmly lodged in their rectums, what can we do to break the logjam down on west Washington?
Turns out there is an option available to us in the AZ Constitution and Arizona Revised Statutes.
From Article 8, Part 1, Section 1 of the AZ Constitution -
From Article 8, Part 1, Section 2 -
From ARS Title 19, Section 209 -
The bottom line is that these folks were elected to office to run the state, not to run it into the ground.
*In this context, "dust" is a euphemism for "bovine-based solid biological waste matter," a phrase that is itself a euphemism. :)
So, in the event that the Republican caucus of the lege and their governor (their edict is that no Democrats are allowed to participate in this exercise) choose to keep their rectums firmly lodged in their rectums, what can we do to break the logjam down on west Washington?
Turns out there is an option available to us in the AZ Constitution and Arizona Revised Statutes.
From Article 8, Part 1, Section 1 of the AZ Constitution -
Every public officer in the state of Arizona, holding an elective office, either by election or appointment, is subject to recall from such office by the qualified electors of the electoral district from which candidates are elected to such office. Such electoral district may include the whole state. Such number of said electors as shall equal twenty-five per centum of the number of votes cast at the last preceding general election for all of the candidates for the office held by such officer, may by petition, which shall be known as a recall petition, demand his recall.
From Article 8, Part 1, Section 2 -
Every recall petition must contain a general statement, in not more than two hundred words, of the grounds of such demand, and must be filed in the office in which petitions for nominations to the office held by the incumbent are required to be filed. The signatures to such recall petition need not all be on one sheet of paper, but each signer must add to his signature the date of his signing said petition, and his place of residence, giving his street and number, if any, should he reside in a town or city. One of the signers of each sheet of such petition, or the person circulating such sheet, must make and subscribe an oath on said sheet, that the signatures thereon are genuine.
From ARS Title 19, Section 209 -
A. If the officer against whom a petition is filed does not resign within five days, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and other legal holidays, after the filing as determined pursuant to section 19-208.03, the order calling a special recall election shall be issued within fifteen days and shall be ordered to be held on the next following consolidated election date pursuant to section 16-204 that is ninety days or more after the order calling the election..There are other relevant sections, especially in ARS Title 19, but you get the hint.
B. A recall election shall be called:
1. If for a state office, including a member of the legislature, by the governor.
2. If for a county officer, or judge or other officer of the superior court in a county, by the board of supervisors of that county.
3. If for a city or town officer, by the legislative body of the city or town.
4. If for a member of a school district governing board, by the county school superintendent of the county in which the school district is located.
C. If a recall petition is against an officer who is directed by this section to call the election it shall be called:
1. If for a state office, by the secretary of state.
2. If for a county office, by the clerk of the superior court.
3. If for a city or town office, by the city or town clerk
The bottom line is that these folks were elected to office to run the state, not to run it into the ground.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Harper making up for lost time
Jack Harper (R-Surprise!) may have started slow this year, but now he is delivering his usual pearls of nuttiness on a regular basis.
From AZCentral.com -
Ummm...Senator Harper? The bill was *not* about regulating behavior that has the potential to harm only the participant. The bill was about regulating behavior that has been shown to endanger non-participants.
"Individual liberty" doesn't protect activities that can injure and even kill others. If it did, then the victims of drunk drivers would be the ones going to jail (perhaps for daring to splatter their blood on the cars of their killers?).
If somebody wants to bungee jump off of a 100-foot tower with a 101-foot bungee cord, that's their problem; if somebody wants to do the same over some innocent bystanders, that's society's, and the legislature's, problem to deal with.
Of course, if you can see the big picture, today's defeat of the texting ban can be combined with the "guns in cars" bill (a measure that Harper also supports) to make a perfect "people need to take responsibility for their own lives" measure.
Logically, given the rationales expressed for both bills, the laws of AZ should be changed to allow drivers to shoot other drivers who are texting while driving.
I mean, it only makes sense - drivers who are texting are endangering those around them, and if those other, armed, drivers are expected to take personal responsibility for activities that they themselves aren't engaged in, they should be able to do what they need to do in order to protect themselves.
Call it "Road Rage as public policy."
From AZCentral.com -
The Senate today narrowly rejected a bill that would have banned text messaging while driving.
The bill would have carried a $50 fine for sending or reading text messages while driving, and a $200 fine if the driver had been involved in an accident while texting. It failed by a 14-15 vote.
{snip}
Others saw it as a personal rights issue, according to Sen. Jack Harper, R-Surprise, who voted against the bill.
“We believe in individual liberty and personal responsibility, and we're not going to dictate every aspect of people's lives," Harper said. “People need to take responsibility for their own lives.”
Ummm...Senator Harper? The bill was *not* about regulating behavior that has the potential to harm only the participant. The bill was about regulating behavior that has been shown to endanger non-participants.
"Individual liberty" doesn't protect activities that can injure and even kill others. If it did, then the victims of drunk drivers would be the ones going to jail (perhaps for daring to splatter their blood on the cars of their killers?).
If somebody wants to bungee jump off of a 100-foot tower with a 101-foot bungee cord, that's their problem; if somebody wants to do the same over some innocent bystanders, that's society's, and the legislature's, problem to deal with.
Of course, if you can see the big picture, today's defeat of the texting ban can be combined with the "guns in cars" bill (a measure that Harper also supports) to make a perfect "people need to take responsibility for their own lives" measure.
Logically, given the rationales expressed for both bills, the laws of AZ should be changed to allow drivers to shoot other drivers who are texting while driving.
I mean, it only makes sense - drivers who are texting are endangering those around them, and if those other, armed, drivers are expected to take personal responsibility for activities that they themselves aren't engaged in, they should be able to do what they need to do in order to protect themselves.
Call it "Road Rage as public policy."
I can't make this stuff up...
When I heard about this, I just couldn't believe it.
Not that I couldn't believe that someone said it, or that the person who said it was a Republican official.
What I couldn't believe is that she isn't an Arizona Republican, perhaps even chair of one of the Appropriations Committees or even a candidate for Governor here.
From StLToday -
And the piece de resistance in all of this?
I can't make this stuff up.
Nobody can.
Thanks for the heads-up on this to Keith Olbermann. Rep. Davis was named his "Worst Person In The World" today, and you've got to be pretty bad to knock Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly out of contention for that honor.
Note: a brief examination of the bills sponsored/cosponsored by Rep. Davis show that she would fit in well with the Arizona Chapter Of The Flat Earth Society (aka - the AZ lege's Republican caucus - HB46, restricting a woman's right to choose under the guise of "informed consent"; HB47, subsidizing home schoolers; HB814, abolishing state income and estate taxes in favor of a broad sales tax; HB1158, outlawing the female breast other than for the feeding of babies (OK, it outlaws *exposing* the female breast. I think this one was aimed at strippers); HJR37, an anti-EFCA proposal; HB417, establishing a tax credit for donations to scholarship granting organizations (surprisingly, this one isn't called "Yarbrough's Law"), and HB170, Missouri's version of the "guns in cars" bill that is winding its way through the AZ lege.
In fact, if I didn't know that I was looking at the website of the *Missouri* legislature, her list of bills sponsored could easily be mistaken for that of any of a couple of dozen AZ legislators.
I'd bet that she is a member of ALEC, but since they're rather secretive about which legislators are active members of the organization...
Later...
Not that I couldn't believe that someone said it, or that the person who said it was a Republican official.
What I couldn't believe is that she isn't an Arizona Republican, perhaps even chair of one of the Appropriations Committees or even a candidate for Governor here.
From StLToday -
State Rep. Cynthia Davis, R-O'Fallon, is staking out a strong position on child hunger: She's for it.
"Hunger can be a positive motivator," she notes in the latest edition of her newsletter.
More precisely, Ms. Davis is against summer feeding programs for poor kids. They are an excuse "to create an expansion of a government program," she says.
{snip}
"Tip: If you work for McDonald's, they will feed you for free during your break."
And the piece de resistance in all of this?
Ms. Davis chairs the House Special Standing Committee on Children and Families.
I can't make this stuff up.
Nobody can.
Thanks for the heads-up on this to Keith Olbermann. Rep. Davis was named his "Worst Person In The World" today, and you've got to be pretty bad to knock Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly out of contention for that honor.
Note: a brief examination of the bills sponsored/cosponsored by Rep. Davis show that she would fit in well with the Arizona Chapter Of The Flat Earth Society (aka - the AZ lege's Republican caucus - HB46, restricting a woman's right to choose under the guise of "informed consent"; HB47, subsidizing home schoolers; HB814, abolishing state income and estate taxes in favor of a broad sales tax; HB1158, outlawing the female breast other than for the feeding of babies (OK, it outlaws *exposing* the female breast. I think this one was aimed at strippers); HJR37, an anti-EFCA proposal; HB417, establishing a tax credit for donations to scholarship granting organizations (surprisingly, this one isn't called "Yarbrough's Law"), and HB170, Missouri's version of the "guns in cars" bill that is winding its way through the AZ lege.
In fact, if I didn't know that I was looking at the website of the *Missouri* legislature, her list of bills sponsored could easily be mistaken for that of any of a couple of dozen AZ legislators.
I'd bet that she is a member of ALEC, but since they're rather secretive about which legislators are active members of the organization...
Later...
Sunday, June 21, 2009
The coming week - everybody but the lege edition
As usual, all info gathered from the relevant websites and subject to change without notice...
...In the U.S. House, this week's agenda has the usual memorials, housekeeping, and non-controversial bills (such as H.R. 1016, the Veterans Health Care Budget Reform and Transparency Act of 2009 (cosponsored by AZ'ers Mitchell, Kirkpatrick, Grijalva, and Pastor). It also has H.R. 2892, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2010, H.R. 2647, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 and H.R. [no number assigned as yet], the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010. There will be bickering over debate rules, earmarks, and occasionally, policy.
And money. Oh yeah.
The Defense Authorization Act will have a Rules Committee hearing on Tuesday at 5:00 p.m. EDT; the Homeland Security Appropriations Act will also have a Rules hearing on Tuesday at 5. The Interior and Environment Approps Act doesn't have a Rules hearing scheduled as yet, but the deadline for submitting amendment proposals is Wednesday at 3 p.m., so the hearing will probably be on Thursday with floor consideration on Friday. Though it could be a day earlier for each.
...The Arizona Corporation Commission has a number of hearings scheduled this week, as well as two days of a full Commission meeting on Tuesday and Wednesday. That agenda is here. This one is a utilities meeting, so it is loaded with water, power, and communications-related items, including some water rate hikes.
...The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors has a Special Meeting scheduled for Monday at 10 a.m. This meeting truly will be "special" - the agenda is short but significant. They will be considering final approval of the county's property tax rate (reduced from $1.0327 to $0.9903, but resulting in a revenue increase of $9,687,492), the FY2010 budget for Maricopa County ($2,136,275,386), County Improvement Districts (varies by district), the Flood Control District ($96,730,311), the Library District ($31,524,526), and the Stadium District ($10,555,364).
Immediately after that meeting will be another Special Meeting related to a number of IGAs (InterGovermental Agreements) relating to the Sheriff's office.
After that one, there will be a third Special Meeting to "amend the FY 2009-10 Schedule of Premium Pay Rates applicable to all employees paid through the Maricopa County payroll system."
And while it is as yet unscheduled, an Executive Session meeting on Wednesday or Thursday isn't out of the question.
They've had one pretty much every week for months now.
...The Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project doesn't have quite as eventful a week - on Thursday, there will be a Maintenance Orientation meeting, a Work/Study session related to power, and a meeting of CAP's Strategic Planning Task Force. No votes will be taken at any of the meetings.
...The Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District will meet on Tuesday. There will be an executive session at 5:30 p.m. for "Discussion for legal advice with attorney of the Governing Board--A.R.S. Section 38-431.03(A)(3) -- Payment of assessment," followed by a regular meeting at 6:30 p.m.
...The Board of Directors of the Maricopa Integrated Health System has meetings scheduled for both Monday and Wednesday.
Monday's Special Meeting has the usual items for "special" meetings at this time of the year - a legislative update, approval of the District's tax levy, and, oh yeah, approval of the District's FY2010 budget.
Wednesday's Formal Meeting (aka - MIHS's regular meeting) is much more mundane. The highlight of that agenda looks to be Item 2 - Reports to the Board and Item 6 - Financial Report. You've got to be a geek/numbers junkie to get into those, though. :)
...The Citizens Clean Elections Commission is scheduled to meet on Thursday at 9:30 a.m. No agenda posted yet.
...The Tempe City Council isn't scheduled to meet this week.
...The Scottsdale City Council will hold a special meeting on Tuesday to interview and appointment community members to some of the City's boards and commissions, authorize adjustments to the FY2008/9 budget, and to consider citizen petitions to remove the City Attorney, reconsider the City's Retirement Incentive Program, and to go after former City Manager Jan Dolan over some projects she was assigned after her termination that were part of the separation agreement.
That meeting actually looks like it could be the most colorful of the week (non-legislature category). The City Attorney, Deborah Robberson, has been on the Council'sshit list since the regime change in January, so the long knives could be out at this meeting. Since Jan Dolan is already gone, she'll just be an after dinner mint. Robberson will be the main course.
Later...
...In the U.S. House, this week's agenda has the usual memorials, housekeeping, and non-controversial bills (such as H.R. 1016, the Veterans Health Care Budget Reform and Transparency Act of 2009 (cosponsored by AZ'ers Mitchell, Kirkpatrick, Grijalva, and Pastor). It also has H.R. 2892, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2010, H.R. 2647, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 and H.R. [no number assigned as yet], the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010. There will be bickering over debate rules, earmarks, and occasionally, policy.
And money. Oh yeah.
The Defense Authorization Act will have a Rules Committee hearing on Tuesday at 5:00 p.m. EDT; the Homeland Security Appropriations Act will also have a Rules hearing on Tuesday at 5. The Interior and Environment Approps Act doesn't have a Rules hearing scheduled as yet, but the deadline for submitting amendment proposals is Wednesday at 3 p.m., so the hearing will probably be on Thursday with floor consideration on Friday. Though it could be a day earlier for each.
...The Arizona Corporation Commission has a number of hearings scheduled this week, as well as two days of a full Commission meeting on Tuesday and Wednesday. That agenda is here. This one is a utilities meeting, so it is loaded with water, power, and communications-related items, including some water rate hikes.
...The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors has a Special Meeting scheduled for Monday at 10 a.m. This meeting truly will be "special" - the agenda is short but significant. They will be considering final approval of the county's property tax rate (reduced from $1.0327 to $0.9903, but resulting in a revenue increase of $9,687,492), the FY2010 budget for Maricopa County ($2,136,275,386), County Improvement Districts (varies by district), the Flood Control District ($96,730,311), the Library District ($31,524,526), and the Stadium District ($10,555,364).
Immediately after that meeting will be another Special Meeting related to a number of IGAs (InterGovermental Agreements) relating to the Sheriff's office.
After that one, there will be a third Special Meeting to "amend the FY 2009-10 Schedule of Premium Pay Rates applicable to all employees paid through the Maricopa County payroll system."
And while it is as yet unscheduled, an Executive Session meeting on Wednesday or Thursday isn't out of the question.
They've had one pretty much every week for months now.
...The Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project doesn't have quite as eventful a week - on Thursday, there will be a Maintenance Orientation meeting, a Work/Study session related to power, and a meeting of CAP's Strategic Planning Task Force. No votes will be taken at any of the meetings.
...The Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District will meet on Tuesday. There will be an executive session at 5:30 p.m. for "Discussion for legal advice with attorney of the Governing Board--A.R.S. Section 38-431.03(A)(3) -- Payment of assessment," followed by a regular meeting at 6:30 p.m.
...The Board of Directors of the Maricopa Integrated Health System has meetings scheduled for both Monday and Wednesday.
Monday's Special Meeting has the usual items for "special" meetings at this time of the year - a legislative update, approval of the District's tax levy, and, oh yeah, approval of the District's FY2010 budget.
Wednesday's Formal Meeting (aka - MIHS's regular meeting) is much more mundane. The highlight of that agenda looks to be Item 2 - Reports to the Board and Item 6 - Financial Report. You've got to be a geek/numbers junkie to get into those, though. :)
...The Citizens Clean Elections Commission is scheduled to meet on Thursday at 9:30 a.m. No agenda posted yet.
...The Tempe City Council isn't scheduled to meet this week.
...The Scottsdale City Council will hold a special meeting on Tuesday to interview and appointment community members to some of the City's boards and commissions, authorize adjustments to the FY2008/9 budget, and to consider citizen petitions to remove the City Attorney, reconsider the City's Retirement Incentive Program, and to go after former City Manager Jan Dolan over some projects she was assigned after her termination that were part of the separation agreement.
That meeting actually looks like it could be the most colorful of the week (non-legislature category). The City Attorney, Deborah Robberson, has been on the Council's
Later...
AZ U.S. House members' budgets
Info courtesy Politico.
The linked article is dated June 19, so for the sake of easy math, I'm assuming the numbers are current as of June 15. The presumption is that the amount spent represents the amount spent through 5.5 months of a 12-month year, 0r 45.83% of the year.
That might not be perfectly accurate (I don't know for sure what Politico's cut-off date was), but since everyone is subject to the same assumption, it works for comparison's sake.
Representative
2009 Allotment ($)
Total Spent ($)
% of budget spent
Jeff Flake (R-AZ6.)
1,559,332.00
301,492.87
19.33%
Trent Franks (R-AZ2)
1,604,247.00
278,691.39
17.37%
Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ8)
1,527,622.00
270,642.79
17.72%
Raul Grijalva (D-AZ7)
1,508,218.00
276,943.30
18.36%
Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ1)
1,515,010.00
135,196.04
8.92%
Harry Mitchell (D-AZ5)
1,515,410.00
264,989.60
17.49%
Ed Pastor (D-AZ4)
1,483,786.00
268,599.51
18.1%
John Shadegg (R-AZ3)
1,512,691.00
298,370.28
19.72%
Other than a few outliers (like Kirkpatrick's <9%), the AZ delegation and Congress as a whole is pretty consistent. At nearly the halfway point of the year, most House members have spent 17 - 21% of their budgets, leading me to believe that either -
1. Some of their bigger expenses are yet to come; or
2. Their office budgets are incredibly inflated, perhaps so that members can generate good press in December with press releases touting their frugality as evidenced by how much money they are returning at the end of the year.
The linked article is dated June 19, so for the sake of easy math, I'm assuming the numbers are current as of June 15. The presumption is that the amount spent represents the amount spent through 5.5 months of a 12-month year, 0r 45.83% of the year.
That might not be perfectly accurate (I don't know for sure what Politico's cut-off date was), but since everyone is subject to the same assumption, it works for comparison's sake.
Representative
2009 Allotment ($)
Total Spent ($)
% of budget spent
Jeff Flake (R-AZ6.)
1,559,332.00
301,492.87
19.33%
Trent Franks (R-AZ2)
1,604,247.00
278,691.39
17.37%
Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ8)
1,527,622.00
270,642.79
17.72%
Raul Grijalva (D-AZ7)
1,508,218.00
276,943.30
18.36%
Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ1)
1,515,010.00
135,196.04
8.92%
Harry Mitchell (D-AZ5)
1,515,410.00
264,989.60
17.49%
Ed Pastor (D-AZ4)
1,483,786.00
268,599.51
18.1%
John Shadegg (R-AZ3)
1,512,691.00
298,370.28
19.72%
Other than a few outliers (like Kirkpatrick's <9%), the AZ delegation and Congress as a whole is pretty consistent. At nearly the halfway point of the year, most House members have spent 17 - 21% of their budgets, leading me to believe that either -
1. Some of their bigger expenses are yet to come; or
2. Their office budgets are incredibly inflated, perhaps so that members can generate good press in December with press releases touting their frugality as evidenced by how much money they are returning at the end of the year.
Saturday, June 20, 2009
The coming week - legislative edition
Edit on 6/22 to add info about a JLBC meeting...
As usual, all info gathered from the website of the Arizona legislature and subject to change without notice. And given the mad rush going on down on West Washington, changes should be expected.
Due to the large number of bills scheduled to be heard in committee and on the floor of both chambers this week, linking will be kept to a minimum. Also, I won't be able to go into much depth this week.
If there is something that piques your interest, I suggest visiting the lege's website and perusing the committee agendas (House here, Senate here) and the floor calendars here. If you see a bill that sounds interesting (or to be less tactful, one that sounds putrid), go to "Bill Info" and look up the specific bill you are interested in researching. If a committee agenda lists a bill, but shows that a "strike everything" amendment to the bill will be considered, the text of the amendment may be found here if the sponsor of the amendment has already submitted the language. No guarantees, though.
On to the guts of the post...
Over in the House, the only floor schedule that has been posted is a short COW agenda for Monday. Three bad bills, includeing HB2171, which has been amended into a scheme to funnel the retirement funds of state employees into the science foundation that the lege thought was a waste of money.
On Monday, House Ways and Means is meeting at 2 p.m. (or upon adjournment of the House floor session) in HHR1 for consideration of a short agenda (two items thus far).
Also at 2 on Monday:
House Natural Resources will meet in HHR4. Some pro-mining company/anti-environment bills here.
House Education will meet in HHR3. Some anti-public education and pro-charter schools bills on this agenda.
House Banking will meet in HHR5. One item on the agenda so far.
Tuesday, the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) will meet at 8 a.m. in HHR4. The agenda is mostly about fund transfers.
On Tuesday, House Government will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR4. Nuggets here include a striker to SB1375 from Russell Pearce, Pam Gorman, Chuck Gray and more concerning "parents' rights; discipline; education; health" and SCR1004 from Jack Harper concerning "American Sovereignty Restoration Act."
On Wednesday, House Commerce will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR5. The agenda includes a striker from Rep. John Kavanagh defining the authority of various elected county officials. Also known as the "Hey! Maricopa County Board of Supervisors! Leave Arpaio and Thomas alone! They can do *whatever* they want" bill.
That's all that's posted for the House side of the lege so far, but it is reasonable to expect updates and changes. Check back frequently during the week.
Over on the Senate side, no floor schedules have been posted yet. Which is a good thing, considering that some of the committee agendas literally have dozens of measures up for consideration.
On Monday at 1:30, Senate Natural Resources will meet in SHR109. Most of the agenda looks OK, but Sen. Steve Pierce (R-Rancher) has a couple of srikers related to state trust land reform. Probably not a good thing.
Also at 1:30 on Monday, Senate Judiciary will meet in SHR1. This agenda is loaded will a wide variety of ugly. It includes HB2331 (prohibits sanctuary city policies), HB2474 (employers can't ban guns in locked vehicles on their premises), and HB2533 (targeting day laborers for seeking employment by the side of the road).
On Tuesday at 1:30 p.m., Senate Commerce will meet in SHR1. The lowlight here is consideration of HCM2004, the anti-Employee Free Choice Act memorial.
Also at 1:30 on Tuesday, Senate Appropriations will meet in SHR109. The agenda includes a striker to HB2280 relating to "illegal aliens; trespassing; enforcement," HB2369 (allowing the lege to take non-custodial federal monies from their recipients and reappropriate them), and a striker to SB1038 to change the way that the state shares revenues with Native American tribes (another Pearce special).
On Wednesday at 1:30 p.m., Senate Veterans will meet in SHR2. Short agenda so far.
On Wednesday at 8:30 a.m. Senate Public Safety will meet in SHR3. This one includes HCM2009, a memorial to Congress opposing firearms regulations.
On Wednesday at 9:00 a.m., Senate Health will meet in SHR1. Looks OK so far.
At 1:30 p.m. on Wednesday, Senate Finance will meet in SHR3. I don't understand most of this stuff, but HB2346 is clear - it will grant a property tax exemption to charter schools.
Also at 1:30 on Wednesday, Senate Education will meet in SHR1. Some good bills (HB2495, Rep. Pat Flemings bill to grant in-state tuition status to veterans) but most bad (like SB1172, Russell Pearce's bid to compel schools to collect and report information on students' immigrations status).
On Thursday at 9:00 a.m., Senate Retirement will meet in SHR3. This agenda includes SCR1037 (property tax rollback) and HCM2009 (again, the memorial to Congress opposing federal firearms regulations).
On Thursday at 8:30 a.m., Senate Government will meet in SHR1. So far, the agenda looks pretty mild, but Jack Harper chairs this committee. Ugliness is always a threat with him.
Time to head to bed...Getting up *early* tomorrow.
As usual, all info gathered from the website of the Arizona legislature and subject to change without notice. And given the mad rush going on down on West Washington, changes should be expected.
Due to the large number of bills scheduled to be heard in committee and on the floor of both chambers this week, linking will be kept to a minimum. Also, I won't be able to go into much depth this week.
If there is something that piques your interest, I suggest visiting the lege's website and perusing the committee agendas (House here, Senate here) and the floor calendars here. If you see a bill that sounds interesting (or to be less tactful, one that sounds putrid), go to "Bill Info" and look up the specific bill you are interested in researching. If a committee agenda lists a bill, but shows that a "strike everything" amendment to the bill will be considered, the text of the amendment may be found here if the sponsor of the amendment has already submitted the language. No guarantees, though.
On to the guts of the post...
Over in the House, the only floor schedule that has been posted is a short COW agenda for Monday. Three bad bills, includeing HB2171, which has been amended into a scheme to funnel the retirement funds of state employees into the science foundation that the lege thought was a waste of money.
On Monday, House Ways and Means is meeting at 2 p.m. (or upon adjournment of the House floor session) in HHR1 for consideration of a short agenda (two items thus far).
Also at 2 on Monday:
House Natural Resources will meet in HHR4. Some pro-mining company/anti-environment bills here.
House Education will meet in HHR3. Some anti-public education and pro-charter schools bills on this agenda.
House Banking will meet in HHR5. One item on the agenda so far.
Tuesday, the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) will meet at 8 a.m. in HHR4. The agenda is mostly about fund transfers.
On Tuesday, House Government will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR4. Nuggets here include a striker to SB1375 from Russell Pearce, Pam Gorman, Chuck Gray and more concerning "parents' rights; discipline; education; health" and SCR1004 from Jack Harper concerning "American Sovereignty Restoration Act."
On Wednesday, House Commerce will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR5. The agenda includes a striker from Rep. John Kavanagh defining the authority of various elected county officials. Also known as the "Hey! Maricopa County Board of Supervisors! Leave Arpaio and Thomas alone! They can do *whatever* they want" bill.
That's all that's posted for the House side of the lege so far, but it is reasonable to expect updates and changes. Check back frequently during the week.
Over on the Senate side, no floor schedules have been posted yet. Which is a good thing, considering that some of the committee agendas literally have dozens of measures up for consideration.
On Monday at 1:30, Senate Natural Resources will meet in SHR109. Most of the agenda looks OK, but Sen. Steve Pierce (R-Rancher) has a couple of srikers related to state trust land reform. Probably not a good thing.
Also at 1:30 on Monday, Senate Judiciary will meet in SHR1. This agenda is loaded will a wide variety of ugly. It includes HB2331 (prohibits sanctuary city policies), HB2474 (employers can't ban guns in locked vehicles on their premises), and HB2533 (targeting day laborers for seeking employment by the side of the road).
On Tuesday at 1:30 p.m., Senate Commerce will meet in SHR1. The lowlight here is consideration of HCM2004, the anti-Employee Free Choice Act memorial.
Also at 1:30 on Tuesday, Senate Appropriations will meet in SHR109. The agenda includes a striker to HB2280 relating to "illegal aliens; trespassing; enforcement," HB2369 (allowing the lege to take non-custodial federal monies from their recipients and reappropriate them), and a striker to SB1038 to change the way that the state shares revenues with Native American tribes (another Pearce special).
On Wednesday at 1:30 p.m., Senate Veterans will meet in SHR2. Short agenda so far.
On Wednesday at 8:30 a.m. Senate Public Safety will meet in SHR3. This one includes HCM2009, a memorial to Congress opposing firearms regulations.
On Wednesday at 9:00 a.m., Senate Health will meet in SHR1. Looks OK so far.
At 1:30 p.m. on Wednesday, Senate Finance will meet in SHR3. I don't understand most of this stuff, but HB2346 is clear - it will grant a property tax exemption to charter schools.
Also at 1:30 on Wednesday, Senate Education will meet in SHR1. Some good bills (HB2495, Rep. Pat Flemings bill to grant in-state tuition status to veterans) but most bad (like SB1172, Russell Pearce's bid to compel schools to collect and report information on students' immigrations status).
On Thursday at 9:00 a.m., Senate Retirement will meet in SHR3. This agenda includes SCR1037 (property tax rollback) and HCM2009 (again, the memorial to Congress opposing federal firearms regulations).
On Thursday at 8:30 a.m., Senate Government will meet in SHR1. So far, the agenda looks pretty mild, but Jack Harper chairs this committee. Ugliness is always a threat with him.
Time to head to bed...Getting up *early* tomorrow.
Friday, June 19, 2009
*Now* we know why this session of the lege is taking sooooo long...
From AZCentral.com -
Of course, if the egos on West Washington can't stop bickering over who can do more harm to the state, the July trial may not take place due to a government shutdown. Justice courts may be a county function, but much of the county's revenue comes through the state, and if the state treasury is closed, lesser levels of government will soon feel the pinch in the event of a state government shutdown.
As the state legislative session continues on in a budget stalemate, Sen. John Huppenthal's trial on misdemeanor charges of theft and tampering with a campaign sign has been pushed back a month.
While his attorney, Booker Evans, has asked that the senator not go to trial until after the legislative session in accordance with the state Constitution, he said the prosecution also wanted to reschedule to accommodate police officers involved in the case.
The trial was originally slotted to begin June 25. It's now on the docket for July 29 in San Marcos Justice Court.
Of course, if the egos on West Washington can't stop bickering over who can do more harm to the state, the July trial may not take place due to a government shutdown. Justice courts may be a county function, but much of the county's revenue comes through the state, and if the state treasury is closed, lesser levels of government will soon feel the pinch in the event of a state government shutdown.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Overheard at the lege...
Sometimes you can learn a lot just by sitting quietly and looking like you aren't listening...
With all of the usual caveats about rumors...
The strange thing today was that while I was imitating a fly on the wall at the lege, most of the talk concerned the Governor.
1. Jan Brewer is strongly leaning against running for a full term as Governor; the unrelenting confrontations with the lege have her thoroughly disgusted with the whole thing.
2. If she was male, the lege leadership wouldn't be so passionately hostile to her.
3. Everybody expects the lege leadership to transmit their budget to the Governor at the last possible moment, forcing her to sign their budget or shut down the state government. (Yeah, that isn't exactly breaking news. :) )
4. She's not backing down.
4. People seemed to think that any shutdown would be a short one - Senate President Bob Burns has a vacation (to Europe?) scheduled for early July, and the annual meeting of the conservative organization, the American Legislative Exchange Council is taking place in the middle of the month. The expectation seems to be that any situation would be cleared up before Burns leaves the country.
5. Apparently that striker taking money from Camp Navajo's operations fund isn't the first time that Harper has gone after them. According to gossip, he wants the camp to accept mercury for storage. There is a lot of money in it.
Mercury is an incredibly toxic substance.
What wasn't made clear (I wasn't exactly in a position to ask for clarification) is who would benefit financially from exposing northern AZ and its resident to mercury - the AZ government and/or National Guard, or Harper himself.
Later...
With all of the usual caveats about rumors...
The strange thing today was that while I was imitating a fly on the wall at the lege, most of the talk concerned the Governor.
1. Jan Brewer is strongly leaning against running for a full term as Governor; the unrelenting confrontations with the lege have her thoroughly disgusted with the whole thing.
2. If she was male, the lege leadership wouldn't be so passionately hostile to her.
3. Everybody expects the lege leadership to transmit their budget to the Governor at the last possible moment, forcing her to sign their budget or shut down the state government. (Yeah, that isn't exactly breaking news. :) )
4. She's not backing down.
4. People seemed to think that any shutdown would be a short one - Senate President Bob Burns has a vacation (to Europe?) scheduled for early July, and the annual meeting of the conservative organization, the American Legislative Exchange Council is taking place in the middle of the month. The expectation seems to be that any situation would be cleared up before Burns leaves the country.
5. Apparently that striker taking money from Camp Navajo's operations fund isn't the first time that Harper has gone after them. According to gossip, he wants the camp to accept mercury for storage. There is a lot of money in it.
Mercury is an incredibly toxic substance.
What wasn't made clear (I wasn't exactly in a position to ask for clarification) is who would benefit financially from exposing northern AZ and its resident to mercury - the AZ government and/or National Guard, or Harper himself.
Later...
Live blogging the Senate Veterans Committee meeting
2:29 HB2001, pertaining to state monuments, passed 7 - 0. Meeting adjourned.
2:27 SB1407, sponsor by LD17 State Rep Ed Ableser pertaining to military members and health club contracts, passes 7-0.
2:26 Bill held to give Gowan time to come over from the House; if he doesn't make it, I think this one is going down.
2:23 Harper states that the bill's language is from freshman state Rep. David Gowan.
2:21 Melvin - "During an election, the more signs the better." He could *never* get elected in Scottsdale.
2:19 Burton-Cahill, Alvarez, and the Cities and Town guy are pointing out that the striker is poorly written (overly broad). Melvin defending it.
2:15 I was in error when I wrote that Sen. Hale was here; it's actually Sen. Alvarez. Hale walked in while I was typing this.
2:14 Meeting gavelled into order. No votes yet because not all sens are here yet. Taking public testimony on bills. AZ League of Cities and Towns opposing the Melvin political sign striker.
2:10 The meeting hasn't started, but senators and staff are starting to trickle in. Harper, Melvin, Hale, and Burton-Cahill are here.
1:38 The Senate floor session is still going, so the committee meeting hasn't started yet. One development is that Harper's strike that I discussed yesterday has been withdrawn from today's agenda. Instead, another striker has been offered by Al Melvin, this one to SB1445 relating to political signs in public rights-of-way. A quick perusal of the language shows that it is intended to override any local ordinances that ban political signs (candidate or ballot measure) in public rights-of-way.
If this passes, Scottsdale's gonna be p!ssed. :))
2:27 SB1407, sponsor by LD17 State Rep Ed Ableser pertaining to military members and health club contracts, passes 7-0.
2:26 Bill held to give Gowan time to come over from the House; if he doesn't make it, I think this one is going down.
2:23 Harper states that the bill's language is from freshman state Rep. David Gowan.
2:21 Melvin - "During an election, the more signs the better." He could *never* get elected in Scottsdale.
2:19 Burton-Cahill, Alvarez, and the Cities and Town guy are pointing out that the striker is poorly written (overly broad). Melvin defending it.
2:15 I was in error when I wrote that Sen. Hale was here; it's actually Sen. Alvarez. Hale walked in while I was typing this.
2:14 Meeting gavelled into order. No votes yet because not all sens are here yet. Taking public testimony on bills. AZ League of Cities and Towns opposing the Melvin political sign striker.
2:10 The meeting hasn't started, but senators and staff are starting to trickle in. Harper, Melvin, Hale, and Burton-Cahill are here.
1:38 The Senate floor session is still going, so the committee meeting hasn't started yet. One development is that Harper's strike that I discussed yesterday has been withdrawn from today's agenda. Instead, another striker has been offered by Al Melvin, this one to SB1445 relating to political signs in public rights-of-way. A quick perusal of the language shows that it is intended to override any local ordinances that ban political signs (candidate or ballot measure) in public rights-of-way.
If this passes, Scottsdale's gonna be p!ssed. :))
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Mitchell outraged at VA's careless "care" of veterans
Ya know, I like Congressman Harry Mitchell, I respect him greatly, and I wholeheartedly wish he were more liberal than he is. There are certain issues where I've strongly disagreed with his votes.
However, speaking as someone whose father spent decades utilizing the VA as his primary provider of medical care, I've got absolutely no problems with the work he has been doing for America's veterans.
As chair of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House Veterans Affairs Committee since 2007, he has been tirelessly holding the VA accountable for the quality of the care (or lack thereof) it provides.
Tuesday was no different.
From the LeafChronicle (TN/KY) -
A video clip from the hearing, courtesy USA Today, here.
Tuesday's hearing became necessary when, earlier this year, it came to light that some VA facilities were improperly cleaning (or not cleaning at all) medical equipment, exposing their patients to diseases like HIV and hepatitis. A number of patients were later found to be infected with HIV or hepatitis, but thus far the cause of those infections has not be officially determined.
Mitchell's entire opening statement is here; the prepared statements of the witnesses can be found here (click on the name of the witness). That page should eventually have a video of the entire hearing, but I'm not sure what the timeframe is on that.
Later...
However, speaking as someone whose father spent decades utilizing the VA as his primary provider of medical care, I've got absolutely no problems with the work he has been doing for America's veterans.
As chair of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House Veterans Affairs Committee since 2007, he has been tirelessly holding the VA accountable for the quality of the care (or lack thereof) it provides.
Tuesday was no different.
From the LeafChronicle (TN/KY) -
House lawmakers blasted Veterans Affairs officials on Tuesday after hearing testimony the VA still wasn't following procedures for handling endoscopes, months after discovering that improperly cleaned endoscopes may have exposed veterans to hepatitis and HIV.
"I'm outraged that any of our nation's heroes were potentially infected or that they even have to worry about the possibility," Rep. Harry Mitchell, D-Ariz., chairman of the Veterans Affairs subcommittee on oversight and investigations, said.
A video clip from the hearing, courtesy USA Today, here.
Tuesday's hearing became necessary when, earlier this year, it came to light that some VA facilities were improperly cleaning (or not cleaning at all) medical equipment, exposing their patients to diseases like HIV and hepatitis. A number of patients were later found to be infected with HIV or hepatitis, but thus far the cause of those infections has not be officially determined.
Mitchell's entire opening statement is here; the prepared statements of the witnesses can be found here (click on the name of the witness). That page should eventually have a video of the entire hearing, but I'm not sure what the timeframe is on that.
Later...
IOKIYAR
It seems that Republican bigotry is getting worldwide notice.
From The Times (UK) -
The specific situation that the article refers to is that of Sherri Goforth, a legislative aide to Republican State Senator Diane Black of Tennessee. She sent the offensive email from a legislative email account. Ms. Goforth wasn't fired for her deed, she was reprimanded.
Apparently, her defense of "I sent it to the wrong email list" was heart-rendingly compelling enough that her immediate supervisor (Sen. Black) found that leniency was appropriate in this situation.
I mean, it's not as if she told a joke about the 18-year old daughter of a former candidate for Vice-President that was in poor taste and worse, just wasn't funny.
Then the Republicans would be out for blood.
From The Times (UK) -
An e-mail sent by a Republican aide, entitled Historical Keepsake Photo, features portraits of the first 43 American presidents in a variety of dignified and statesmanlike poses. The succession of white faces, however, comes to an abrupt halt in the final and 44th panel which displays just a pair of cartoon eyeballs set against an entirely dark background.
Little more than six months since the US elected its first black president and Barack Obama declared “change has come to America”, hopes that the country is finally overcoming a racist past are being tempered by evidence that parts of it — sections of the Republican Party in particular — remain aghast at the notion of a black First Family.
The specific situation that the article refers to is that of Sherri Goforth, a legislative aide to Republican State Senator Diane Black of Tennessee. She sent the offensive email from a legislative email account. Ms. Goforth wasn't fired for her deed, she was reprimanded.
Apparently, her defense of "I sent it to the wrong email list" was heart-rendingly compelling enough that her immediate supervisor (Sen. Black) found that leniency was appropriate in this situation.
I mean, it's not as if she told a joke about the 18-year old daughter of a former candidate for Vice-President that was in poor taste and worse, just wasn't funny.
Then the Republicans would be out for blood.
Lesson for the day: always keep an eye on Jack Harper
You know, other than a letter to the editor published in the Arizona Capitol Times that displayed more than a little contempt for poor and working people who have been disproportionately affected by the economic downturn in AZ, state Sen. Jack Harper (R-Surprise!) has been rather quiet this year.
However, as I've learned, "quiet" is not synonymous with "well-behaved."
On Wednesday at 1:30 p.m., Harper will chair a meeting of the Senate Veterans and Military Affairs Committee in SHR2. Part of the agenda for that meeting is a hearing on Harper's strike-everything amendment to SB1055. The striker would create a "homeland security force" of anti-immigrant vigilantes operating under the auspices of the state government.
As bad as that sounds (and I've made it clear before - I think this is a *really* bad idea), the part of Harper's proposal that caught my eye in this year of fiscal crisis is how he plans to pay for it.
From the striker (amended language in BLUE AND CAPITALIZED) -
As shown above in the unamended language, the current section of law (ARS 26-152) stipulates that all monies received for the storage of commodities Camp Navajo shall be used for the operation and maintenance of Camp Navajo.
Camp Navajo is a DOD facility located near Flagstaff that is designed for and used for the storage of various "commodities." Though specific items aren't listed, the list of their customers suggests that the site contains (but is not limited to) ammunition, rocket propellants, and missile components. Least bad: Toys for Tots.
Though something tells me that they wouldn't be so concerned for safety and security (it *is* a military base, after all :) ) if all that was stored there were excess Tickle Me Elmos and the like.
Harper's proposal begs a few questions -
Does his specific citing of *nonnuclear* commodities, which is not part of the current law, mean that he wants Camp Navajo to accept all commodities up to and including chemical and biological "commodities" to pay for his team of vigilantes?
Does the change in the language mean that Camp Navajo doesn't currently accept commodities of a nuclear, biological, or chemical nature, and this would now allow the Camp Navajo to do so?
If so, does Harper plan to hold public hearings in northern AZ so that the folks most likely to be exposed to danger from this scheme (in the event of an accident) can weigh in on the matter?
How much money would Harper's amendment siphon away from Camp Navajo's operations in order to subsidize his vigilantes?
Would the loss of that money impact the safety of operations at Camp Navajo? Safety is a concern here, because even if the commodities that are stored at the camp aren't of the nuclear, biological, or chemical variety, the items that are stored there tend to go "boom." Hell, most of them are *designed* to go boom.
Does Harper realize that, regardless of the nature of the commodities stored at Camp Navajo, most of us would never have heard of it until he decided to use it to funnel money to his vigilante force? And that any uproar from this is his own fault?
And does Harper want to start a statewide campaign as the guy who reduced funding for a National Guard operation to fund one of his pet projects?
Right now, I have more questions than answers.
Calls to Camp Navajo and an AZ National Guard PIO didn't clear up much in terms of these questions. I got the impression that the PIO had never been asked questions about the financing of operations. I also got the impression that he hates political questions (he wasn't rude or anything, but military officials have to tread a fine line when discussing the activities of the civilian authorities who oversee military operations.)
A message left at the office of Sen. Harper hasn't been returned yet.
Another lesson for the day - always read the fine print. I almost skipped the payment part of the striker after reading what I thought were the "guts" of the proposal.
Later...
However, as I've learned, "quiet" is not synonymous with "well-behaved."
On Wednesday at 1:30 p.m., Harper will chair a meeting of the Senate Veterans and Military Affairs Committee in SHR2. Part of the agenda for that meeting is a hearing on Harper's strike-everything amendment to SB1055. The striker would create a "homeland security force" of anti-immigrant vigilantes operating under the auspices of the state government.
As bad as that sounds (and I've made it clear before - I think this is a *really* bad idea), the part of Harper's proposal that caught my eye in this year of fiscal crisis is how he plans to pay for it.
From the striker (amended language in BLUE AND CAPITALIZED) -
Sec. 2. Section 26-152, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:
{snip}
E. A camp Navajo fund is established for the operation, maintenance, capital improvements and personal services necessary for the national guard to operate a regional training site and storage facility at Bellemont. The fund consists of monies received from storage of commodities and services provided as approved by the adjutant general, EXCEPT THAT THE ADJUTANT GENERAL SHALL ACCEPT ANY NONNUCLEAR COMMODITIES OFFERED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR STORAGE. MONIES RECEIVED FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR STORAGE OF THESE COMMODITIES SHALL BE ACCOUNTED FOR SEPARATELY IN THE CAMP NAVAJO FUND AND SHALL BE TRANSFERRED FOR DEPOSIT IN THE HOMELAND SECURITY FORCE FUND ESTABLISHED BY SECTION 26-128.
As shown above in the unamended language, the current section of law (ARS 26-152) stipulates that all monies received for the storage of commodities Camp Navajo shall be used for the operation and maintenance of Camp Navajo.
Camp Navajo is a DOD facility located near Flagstaff that is designed for and used for the storage of various "commodities." Though specific items aren't listed, the list of their customers suggests that the site contains (but is not limited to) ammunition, rocket propellants, and missile components. Least bad: Toys for Tots.
Though something tells me that they wouldn't be so concerned for safety and security (it *is* a military base, after all :) ) if all that was stored there were excess Tickle Me Elmos and the like.
Harper's proposal begs a few questions -
Does his specific citing of *nonnuclear* commodities, which is not part of the current law, mean that he wants Camp Navajo to accept all commodities up to and including chemical and biological "commodities" to pay for his team of vigilantes?
Does the change in the language mean that Camp Navajo doesn't currently accept commodities of a nuclear, biological, or chemical nature, and this would now allow the Camp Navajo to do so?
If so, does Harper plan to hold public hearings in northern AZ so that the folks most likely to be exposed to danger from this scheme (in the event of an accident) can weigh in on the matter?
How much money would Harper's amendment siphon away from Camp Navajo's operations in order to subsidize his vigilantes?
Would the loss of that money impact the safety of operations at Camp Navajo? Safety is a concern here, because even if the commodities that are stored at the camp aren't of the nuclear, biological, or chemical variety, the items that are stored there tend to go "boom." Hell, most of them are *designed* to go boom.
Does Harper realize that, regardless of the nature of the commodities stored at Camp Navajo, most of us would never have heard of it until he decided to use it to funnel money to his vigilante force? And that any uproar from this is his own fault?
And does Harper want to start a statewide campaign as the guy who reduced funding for a National Guard operation to fund one of his pet projects?
Right now, I have more questions than answers.
Calls to Camp Navajo and an AZ National Guard PIO didn't clear up much in terms of these questions. I got the impression that the PIO had never been asked questions about the financing of operations. I also got the impression that he hates political questions (he wasn't rude or anything, but military officials have to tread a fine line when discussing the activities of the civilian authorities who oversee military operations.)
A message left at the office of Sen. Harper hasn't been returned yet.
Another lesson for the day - always read the fine print. I almost skipped the payment part of the striker after reading what I thought were the "guts" of the proposal.
Later...
Monday, June 15, 2009
Instead of ending Clean Elections, perhaps it should be expanded
Today, the Judiciary Committee of the AZ Senate approved, by a 4 - 3 party-line vote, SCR1025. That measure, if ultimately placed on the ballot and approved by the voters, would end financing for the Clean Elections system of publicly-financed elections in AZ. (East Valley Tribune)
Over on AZCentral.com, however, is a story that illustrates why the system should be expanded to municipal and county elections, not abolished.
From the story -
According to the article, some of the developers and Republican activists and donors involved with the event include Five Star Development, DMB Associates, Lynne Lagarde (a zoning attorney who has worked for *many* developers appearing before the Scottsdale City Council over the years), Fife Symington (yes, the disgraced Republican former Governor is helping Lane with his money issues), State Representative Michelle Reagan, and it will be held in the offices of PR firm Kyle Moyer and Co. (Moyer was a McCain donor; also Renzi, Hayworth, Kyl, and Bush, among others, according to the FEC).
Lane, as would be expected, assured those concerned about the propriety of soliciting big contributions from developers and their representatives who are appearing before him - "It's part of the system and . . . we're certainly well within all those guidelines (of the law)".
Pardon me if I'm not reassured by Lane's protestations in defense of his integrity.
Given that the law he is talking about was written by politicians and is designed to guarantee politicians' continued income, not their continued integity.
That's kind of like having the Mob write racketeering laws, and expecting that the final product will guarantee mobsters' good behavior.
Oh, and if you didn't notice, the line-up of Republican heavyweights supporting Lane, who won an allegedly "non-partisan" municipal election gives lie to the whole ideal of "non-partisan" municipal elections promulgated by the Republicans in the lege when they approved SB1123 on a party-line vote. The measure, if enacted into law, would ban partisan municipal elections in Tucson.
Wonder if they're going to serve up a little shameless hypocrisy with their hors d'oeuvres at Lane's fundraiser?
Over on AZCentral.com, however, is a story that illustrates why the system should be expanded to municipal and county elections, not abolished.
From the story -
Scottsdale Mayor Jim Lane is still working to pay off the campaign debt that helped usher him into office.
A fundraising reception for Lane will be held on Thursday, with the money going toward the Lane 4 Scottsdale committee.
The host committee for the event includes former Arizona Gov. Fife Symington, local developers, zoning attorneys and active members of the Arizona Republic Party.
According to the article, some of the developers and Republican activists and donors involved with the event include Five Star Development, DMB Associates, Lynne Lagarde (a zoning attorney who has worked for *many* developers appearing before the Scottsdale City Council over the years), Fife Symington (yes, the disgraced Republican former Governor is helping Lane with his money issues), State Representative Michelle Reagan, and it will be held in the offices of PR firm Kyle Moyer and Co. (Moyer was a McCain donor; also Renzi, Hayworth, Kyl, and Bush, among others, according to the FEC).
Lane, as would be expected, assured those concerned about the propriety of soliciting big contributions from developers and their representatives who are appearing before him - "It's part of the system and . . . we're certainly well within all those guidelines (of the law)".
Pardon me if I'm not reassured by Lane's protestations in defense of his integrity.
Given that the law he is talking about was written by politicians and is designed to guarantee politicians' continued income, not their continued integity.
That's kind of like having the Mob write racketeering laws, and expecting that the final product will guarantee mobsters' good behavior.
Oh, and if you didn't notice, the line-up of Republican heavyweights supporting Lane, who won an allegedly "non-partisan" municipal election gives lie to the whole ideal of "non-partisan" municipal elections promulgated by the Republicans in the lege when they approved SB1123 on a party-line vote. The measure, if enacted into law, would ban partisan municipal elections in Tucson.
Wonder if they're going to serve up a little shameless hypocrisy with their hors d'oeuvres at Lane's fundraiser?
Just when you think that another state had overtaken AZ for the title of "Most Dysfunctional"...
...good ol' Jan Brewer comes through like the trooper that she is...
Up in New York, the Reps and Dems in the state senate there are creating all sorts of havoc over who is in charge of the state senate - the Dems were in charge, then two of members of their caucus switched sides, giving the Reps control, and now at least one of the Dems has switched back, leaving the body tied and without a lieutenant governor to break ties (they had one, but he's governor now).
Yup, it's gotten pretty bad there, so bad that they came within a hair's-breadth of dethroning Arizona's government as the most dysfunctional in the country.
They failed in that quest (as if that title is something anyone would "quest" for) because of three things -
1. They have a state budget. We've got 15 days between us and a government shutdown.
2. They may have some silliness going on, but at least it's bipartisan. Unlike AZ, both Democrats and Republicans are heavily involved.
3. We have Jan Brewer, Bob Burns, and Kirk Adams, and simply put, they don't.
To whit, from an AZCentral.com piece -
Up in New York, the Reps and Dems in the state senate there are creating all sorts of havoc over who is in charge of the state senate - the Dems were in charge, then two of members of their caucus switched sides, giving the Reps control, and now at least one of the Dems has switched back, leaving the body tied and without a lieutenant governor to break ties (they had one, but he's governor now).
Yup, it's gotten pretty bad there, so bad that they came within a hair's-breadth of dethroning Arizona's government as the most dysfunctional in the country.
They failed in that quest (as if that title is something anyone would "quest" for) because of three things -
1. They have a state budget. We've got 15 days between us and a government shutdown.
2. They may have some silliness going on, but at least it's bipartisan. Unlike AZ, both Democrats and Republicans are heavily involved.
3. We have Jan Brewer, Bob Burns, and Kirk Adams, and simply put, they don't.
To whit, from an AZCentral.com piece -
Gov. Jan Brewer blasted legislative leaders for their refusal to send her a series of budget bills, and threatened to file a lawsuit if she doesn't have the GOP spending plan by 5 p.m. Monday.Stay tuned...
Senate President Bob Burns and House Speaker Kirk Adams, meanwhile, were caught off guard by Brewer's demands. They said they have no plans to send Brewer the budget, and contended that the threat of legal action would only slow negotiations.
“Frankly, what it does is raise the specter of a government shutdown,” said Adams, R-Mesa.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)