Mr. Flake Pushed an Energy Tax that Republicans Opposed

In 2009, Flake Co-Sponsored A Bill to Raise Carbon Taxes

Career Politician Congressman Flake Claims to be a Conservative but His Colleagues on Capitol Hill Thought His Carbon Tax Was Anything But Conservative

“The bill puts the two lawmakers at odds with Republican congressional leaders, who’ve criticized the Democrats’ cap-and-trade plans as carbon taxes in disguise. ‘Cap and trade is code for increasing taxes, killing American jobs and raising energy costs for consumers,’ House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio said. ‘The so-called ‘cap and trade’ proposal amounts to a carbon tax, plain and simple.’” (James Rosen, “Republican Lawmakers Back Carbon Tax (Yes, That’s Right),” McClatchy Newspapers, 5/13/09; www.mcclatchydc.com/)

Flake’s Carbon Tax Would Cost an Arizona Family of 4 $1,000 a year

Jeff Flake Says He’s Watching Out for Arizona, but He’s Not

For documentation and to try to get an explanation call Congressman Flake at 602-845-0333.

###

Dear Friends,

You may have seen an ad running on television from my opponent claiming that I want a massive energy tax and suggesting that I support cap and trade. This, of course, is untrue.

Let me give you, as Paul Harvey used to say, the rest of the story.

In 2009, President Obama and the Democratic Majority in Congress were pushing the cap-and-trade bill, which most Republicans and I opposed. During debate on the bill, there were a number of us that thought we needed a way to expose the Democrats’ awful plan for what it was — a revenue grab in the worst way.

So we put together a revenue-neutral tax swap designed to counter the Democrats’ bill. Unlike cap and trade, our proposal cut taxes and did not increase spending. The legislation stipulated that any carbon tax revenue raised by the government would go directly into the Social Security Trust Fund, and at the same time the payroll tax would be lowered by the same amount. This way, there was no incentive for politicians to raise the tax, since they wouldn’t get their hands on the money to spend. It was used as a way to call the Democrats’ bluff. I should note that in the end, we succeeded — cap and trade failed.

Many notable conservatives supported our proposal’s honest, market-driven approach, including Arthur Laffer, a noted economist and former economic policy advisor to President Reagan, who said: “The bill that Jeff Flake cosponsored was a smart, free market, conservative approach to expose the Democrat’s Cap and Trade bill for was it was — a massive tax increase.”

Laffer penned an op-ed in the New York Times in support of our approach, as did conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer, writing in the Weekly Standard.

Rest assured that I will, as I have in the past, lead the fight in Congress for lower taxes, limited government and less regulation.

Sincerely,

Jeff Flake

“The people of Arizona and America deserve better” 

PHOENIX, AZ –U.S. Congressman Paul Gosar, D.D.S (R-AZ) released the following statement today in response to the recently-discovered internal emails that suggest the Obama Administration deliberately overstated the environmental impacts of uranium mining to justify its 20-year ban on uranium development on one million acres of federal land in Northern Arizona:

“When the Obama Administration announced their one million acre land-grab earlier this year, I said their actions distorted the truth and outright denied the facts in order to push their big government agenda.  Nearly six months later, my committee has discovered documents that suggest the National Park Service had the scientific evidence, collected by the agency itself, detailing the reality of government deception.  

Today’s reports come at a time when residents of rural Arizona continue to face record unemployment and the need for jobs.  The Obama Administration’s ban should be reversed, and the people of Arizona should be allowed to move forward with these important economic development projects.  These mines could provide over 1,000 high-paying jobs, generate $29 billion in economic output, and would have many other indirect economic benefits that would revitalize our region. 

The people of Arizona and of America deserve better than junk science and political cover up.  They deserve a government that is responsible to the people and focuses on facts, not scare tactics and misinformation.  As a member of the House Natural Resources Committee, I will continue efforts to expose the Administration’s misinformation campaign and to work to spur economic development in Arizona.” 

On January 9th, 2012, the Obama Administration announced it would impose a 20-year ban on uranium mining on one million acres of federal land in Arizona—one of the most uranium-rich areas in the United States.  Internal emails obtained by the House Natural Resources Committee raise significant questions into the science used by the Obama Administration to justify its ban.  In the emails, scientists within the National Park Service discuss how the potential environmental impacts were “grossly overestimated” in the Administration’s record of decision and that the potential impacts were “very minor to negligible.”  More information on the House Natural Resources Committee’s findings can be found here.

Congressman Trent Franks (R-AZ), Paul Gosar (R-AZ) and Jeff Flake (R-AZ) have introduced the “Northern Arizona Mining Continuity Act of 2011,” known as H.R. 3155.  The bill would reverse the Secretary of the Interior’s 20-year ban.

###

Operational Control Should Be Metric for Success

Washington, D.C. – Republican Congressman Jeff Flake, who represents Arizona’s Sixth District, today criticized the border security proposal outlined by the Department of Homeland Security’s Chief of U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

The five-year plan moves away from operational control as the metric for measuring effective and sustainable border security and shifts the focus of border security from being resource-based to risk-based.

“Unless the federal government has operational control, the border is not secured,” said Flake. “When the Tucson Sector looks like the Yuma Sector, the Obama Administration can start patting itself on the back. But to abandon operational control as the metric of success now makes me question the seriousness of the Administration’s proposal.”

“We have a plan in Congress that would put the federal government on the path to operational control – The Border Security Enforcement Act.”

In 2011, Congressman Flake introduced in the House H.R. 1507, the Border Security Enforcement Act of 2011, which is focused on increasing resources along the Southern U.S. border. Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl introduced the legislation in the Senate. Among the 10 key provisions of the bill is the deployment of up to 6,000 National Guard troops and 5,000 additional Border Patrol agents to the United States-Mexico border by 2016. It would create additional Border Patrol stations along the southwest border and six additional permanent Border Patrol Forward Operating Bases and would upgrade existing bases.

###

Bill Will Ease EPA Regulatory Burden for States With Natural Dust Occurrences

Washington, D.C. – Republican Congressman Jeff Flake, who represents Arizona’s Sixth District, today introduced H.R. 5381, the Commonsense Legislative Exceptional Events Reform (CLEER) Act.

In order for states to exclude specific exceedances of air quality standards often caused by naturally-occurring events such as dust storms, they must submit costly and complicated demonstration projects to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for its review. However, the EPA is under no pressure to review this paperwork in a timely manner. Additionally, the current regulations governing exceptional events demonstrations leave the decision entirely at the discretion of the EPA, and the decisions are not appealable.

The CLEER Act remedies these costly and burdensome exceptional events regulations with commonsense reforms in part by requiring the EPA to review states’ exceptional events documentation within 90 days of submission; afford states deference on what should be excluded; carry out a rulemaking in concert with the states on what exceptional events demonstrations must include; and making their decisions on exceptional events demonstrations appealable.

“States shouldn’t face bureaucratic penalties from the EPA for naturally occurring events, like dust storms,” said Flake.

The CLEER Act is supported by a wide variety of air quality stakeholders in Arizona and on the national level. A complete list of the bill’s supporters as well as additional background and information about the CLEER Act are attached.

###

Click here to view the embedded video.

Today’s hearing went well. The Obama Administration took the outrageous step of suing one of the 50 states for trying to enforce federal law. Arizona has been hit disproportionately hard by illegal immigration and the state had no choice but to pass SB 1070 to protect our own citizens.

I have read the transcript of today’s SB 1070 hearing in the US Supreme Court. Section 2, the most important of the 4 sections of SB1070 which are being challenged, appears to have the support of Liberal as well as Conservative Justices, and mainly with a large unanimous vote. Section 2 requires Police Officers to engage in a lawful arrest or stop, and to have reasonable suspicion, to inquire with ICE about whether the person is in this country legally. Even two of the most Liberal Justices, Sotamayor and Breyer, asked questions indicating they may vote to hold that section of the law Constitutional.

The lawyer for Arizona pointed out that a Phoenix Police officer had been shot by a suspect who had been accused of attempted murder in El Salvador, had been pulled over three times before encountering this police officer, but had never had his immigration status checked. That was due to the City of Phoenix policies that would be illegal under Section 2. Had inquiry been made before he encountered the Phoenix officer, that officer would not have been shot.

The comments of several Justices were very encouraging. Justice Scalia noted that under SB 1070, “Arizona is not trying to kick out anybody that the federal government has not already said do not belong here.” A number of the other provisions at issue are state copies of Federal laws where the Obama Administration claims that states cannot enforce identical laws in parallel. Justice Scalia added the analogy that federal law prohibits bank robbery, and stated, “Can it be made a state crime to rob those banks? I think it is.” And Chief Justice Roberts noted that the federal role in enforcing immigration law is not harmed by SB 1070 since “all it does is notify the Federal Government, here’s someone who is here illegally, here’s someone who is removable.”

Most troubling is the Federal Government’s argument that SB 1070 is unconstitutional because Arizona interferes with the Federal monopoly on foreign relations. Arizona has not opened any embassies. It has passed a law that foreign countries disagree with. If a Federal Judge can invalidate a state law on the grounds that other countries disagree with it (and it therefore interferes with the Federal monopoly on foreign relations) America’s sovereignty will be severely compromised. Justice Scalia asked the Obama Administration lawyer if “we have to enforce our laws in a manner that will please Mexico… (that) sounded like what you were saying.”

Finally, I was gratified to see that even the Obama administration lawyer agreed with Chief Justice Roberts’ contention that this case has nothing to do with ethnic and racial profiling. SB 1070 has never allowed racial profiling, and that is a persistent myth that should end today.

###

PHOENIX, Ariz., April 25, 2012 — The Arizona Secretary of State today received transmission from the Arizona Legislature of a crucial ballot referendum designed to spur new job creation and economic development. The state constitutional amendment, called the Small Business Job Creation Act, is positioned to be on Arizona’s November 6, 2012 General Election ballot as Proposition 116.

“Arizona’s small business job creators have heard loud and clear from their state legislators that help is on the way to rollback the job-killing equipment and machinery tax,” said Farrell Quinlan, state director for the National Federation of Independent Business who drafted the referendum with Senate Majority Leader Andy Biggs and other lawmakers.

“The heavy tax burden we place on small business’ equipment and machinery is self-defeating and anti-growth because it punishes the very investment in job creation that Arizona needs to fuel our economic recovery,” Quinlan said.

The Proposition 116 referendum, enumerated Senate Concurrent Resolution 1012 in its legislative form, seeks to amend the Arizona Constitution to reset the personal property tax exemption for new equipment and machinery purchases to an amount equal to the earnings of 50 Arizona workers, approximately $2.4 million. The current constitutional exemption is $50,000 indexed to inflation since 1996 or $68,079 in Tax Year 2012.

“We are very encouraged about Proposition 116’s ultimate success at the ballot box due to the unanimous bipartisan support it received from legislators. It’s a real testament to the soundness of this public policy proposal that every Republican and Democrat lawmaker voted for it. Proposition 116 proves the adage that good policy makes for good politics,” Quinlan concluded.

The unanimous legislative support for SCR 1012 is a rare example of bipartisan consensus from the contentious and often bitterly partisan 50th Arizona Legislature. The Arizona Senate passed the legislation 30-0 on February 16, 2012 and the Arizona House of Representatives passed it 51-0 with eight absent and one vacancy on April 23, 2012.

Proposition 116 must garner 50 percent plus one vote of those voting on the measure this November to amend the state constitution. If passed, the new provisions will affect personal property purchased in 2013 and thereafter while personal property already on the tax rolls will remain unaffected.

According to state law, the Secretary of State will make official the designation of the Small Business Job Creation Act referendum as Proposition 116 after the petition filing deadline passes for citizen initiatives on July 5, 2012. The Secretary of State is required to assign numbers to propositions in the order the measures are filed with their office. SCR 1012 was the third referendum filed for the 2012 ballot following the two measures sent by the Legislature in 2011 that will be designated Proposition 114 and Proposition 115 respectively in accordance with statute.

NFIB has already begun organizing a campaign committee to support the passage of Proposition 116. Those interested in joining that effort should contact NFIB’s Arizona office at (602) 263-7690 or send an email to farrell.quinlan@nfib.org.

# # #

NFIB is the nation’s leading small business association with 350,000 members nationwide and 7,500 in Arizona and has offices in Washington, D.C. and all 50 state capitals.  Founded in 1943 as a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, NFIB gives small and independent business owners a voice in shaping the public policy issues that affect their business. NFIB’s powerful network of grassroots activists send their views directly to state and federal lawmakers through our unique member-only ballot, thus playing a critical role in supporting America’s free enterprise system. NFIB’s mission is to promote and protect the right of our members to own, operate and grow their businesses. More information is available online at www.NFIB.com/newsroom.

Congressman Raul Grijalva writes that Arizona’s immigration law, SB1070 will put our country into chaos, should the U.S. Supreme Court uphold the law. The United States Supreme Court will hear arguments in the matter of Arizona’s immigration law, SB1070, today. A recent poll shows that a majority of Americans favor the law. Eight states have adopted similar laws.

Grijalva’s Republican challenger in the Congressional District 3 race, Gabby Saucedo Mercer, says “Grijalva’s failure, in his ten years in Congress, to sponsor meaningful legislation that would serve the country’s economic and national security while addressing the very difficult questions and issues pertaining to immigration, has created a chaotic atmosphere, in which communication has broken down, and real solutions are not being discussed.”

In his opinion piece, written for U.S. News and reports, Raúl M. Grijalva, the co-chair of the Progressive Caucus, wrote, “Arizona’s SB 1070 should be struck down by the Supreme Court.” Grijalva, the radical congressman from Arizona, argues that the Constitution clearly gives exclusive authority to the federal government over immigration and naturalization issues.”

Gabby Saucedo Mercer is challenging the congressman’s claim that SB1070 grants states “the authority to create immigration policy.” She says, “This sort of mischaracterization and hyperbole does not help the people of this country or Arizona. SB1070 is simply recognition of federal law, it does not in any way, grant state and local law enforcement any extraordinary authority.”

The Governor of Arizona released a statement addressing the lies and distortions offered by the law’s foes like Grijalva, “Despite all of the misrepresentations, misleading rhetoric and outright lies told about SB 1070, public support for this law is as strong as ever. I’ve seen it in the donations from citizens of all 50 states who have dug into their own pocketbooks in order to help defray Arizona’s legal costs.

Saucedo Mercer argues that the law’s popularity has increased as the public has grown more aware of the failure of the federal government to protect our county’s border. “The people of Arizona felt that the federal government had failed to protect the country’s economic health and the people’s welfare. Grijalva has been in office for ten years and has failed to take the lead, as a resident of a large border state, to initiate real changes in immigration. He instead prefers open borders.”

Saucedo Mercer, who has lived in the border area communities of Rio Rico, Sierra Vista and Tucson, knows firsthand the concerns that lead the people of Arizona to pass SB1070. Saucedo Mercer supports the ROB Plan for border security. Saucedo Mercer is a conservative advocate for meaningful immigration reform, who knows firsthand the issues facing hopeful immigrants. She does not support blanket amnesty, but does support immigration reform that offers a rigorous but compassionate path to citizenship.

Gabby Saucedo Mercer, a legal immigrant from Mexico who took an oath to defend the Constitution when she became an American citizen, joins many Arizona law makers in the belief that the Supreme Court will find for the state of Arizona.

The Arizona Latino Republican Association has endorsed the law.

Just last week, Saucedo Mercer spent two days in Nogales, Arizona, listening to business leaders’ and government officials’ concerns about our national and economic security. No one expressed opposition to SB1070, but without exception, they advised Saucedo Mercer that political hyperbole does not help their situation.

###

If you’ve ever signed up for a magazine subscription, bought cable TV, or purchased something from an infomercial, you’ve probably encountered the automatic renewal process. After the initial subscription period ends, some companies continue charging you until you jump through myriad time-consuming hoops. And you may never get your money back.

This happens perpetually to Arizona workers, but the consequences are far greater. Year after year, unions take dues from the paychecks of government workers without asking them for permission. The unions then spend the millions of dollars raked in from automatic renewals to fund political warfare their own members oppose.

The Arizona Legislature is considering HB 2103, a bill that would require unions to get members’ permission every year before taking dues from their paychecks.

Under Arizona law, once you’ve joined a government-employee union, you’re never asked if you’d like to continue authorizing paycheck deductions. Big Labor diverts some of those deductions to political activism, which may directly conflict with your political beliefs and have little to do with your job.

For instance, the Service Employees International Union, which represents more than 1 million local and state government workers, public-school employees, and bus drivers nationally, spent much of 2010 organizing boycotts of Arizona in the wake of SB 1070, the immigration legislation overwhelmingly supported by Arizonans.

A half-dozen states have already passed similar paycheck-protection measures, including union strongholds Michigan and Ohio.

Within five years of the passage of Washington’s paycheck-protection law, voluntary paycheck deductions to the state’s teachers-union PAC had shrunk by 75 percent. Paycheck-protection legislation in Idaho and Utah yielded comparable results.

Paycheck-protection laws give government workers a greater voice and force unions to justify to their members why they should continue to subsidize union bosses’ political activism.

HB 2103 will restore the balance of power to working Arizonans – public employees and taxpayers alike.

Darcy Olsen is president and CEO of the Goldwater Institute.

Learn more:

Arizona State Legislature: HB 2103

Arizona Republic: Bill Would Stop Unions from Raiding Paychecks

Y = Yes
N = No
NV = Not Voting
EXC = Excused
V = Vacant

AYES: 37   NAYS: 22   NOT VOTING: 1   EXCUSED: 0   VACANT: 0

Thank you to those members of the Arizona Legislature who chose to stand for Life and the Unborn.  Thank you Governor Brewer for the courage to sign this important legislation.

“This legislation is consistent with my strong track record of supporting common sense measures to protect the health of women and safeguard our most vulnerable population – the unborn,” said Governor Brewer. “Knowing that abortions become riskier the later they are performed in pregnancy, it only makes sense to prohibit these procedures past twenty weeks.”

Arizona now joins seven states with similar regulations prohibiting abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

Among its provisions, HB 2036:

• ·Bars abortions after 20 weeks due to safety risks to the mother and the likelihood that the unborn child will endure pain;
• Strengthens existing parental consent and informed consent regulations, including requiring that women seeking an abortion receive an ultrasound at least 24 hours in advance, and establishing the development of a website with facts about fetal development and abortion risks.
• Requires that any physician on-site for a surgical abortion have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the abortion clinic, in case of abortion-caused complications.

“I want to thank Governor Brewer for signing the Women’s Health and Safety Act,” said state Rep. Kimberly Yee, R-LD10. “This important bill strengthens Arizona’s laws protecting the health and safety of women, and recognizes the precious life of the preborn baby.”

This is the latest legislation signed into law by Governor Brewer to safeguard the health and safety of women and protect the unborn. Among these measures, the Governor has barred non-physicians from performing abortions, and required written, notarized parental consent for any minor seeking an abortion.

###