by Clint Bolick
Goldwater Institute
 
It was like a scene from Atlas Shrugged: Polly Shaw of China-based Suntech told an Arizona House Government Committee hearing that massive solar production subsidies and even bigger consumer subsidies were not enough. If the Legislature passed House Bill 2701 and repealed the Arizona Corporation Commission’s rules that require utility companies to purchase increasing amounts of solar energy over the next 15 years regardless of the projected $1.2 billion cost to consumers, her company would pull its operations and a few dozen jobs from the state.

The Committee rejected her threat, approving the bill 5-2. But the next day, Governor Jan Brewer and Speaker of the House Kirk Adams, who co-sponsored the bill before deciding to kill it, successfully pressured the primary sponsor, Representative Debbie Lesko, to withdraw it.

Solar may be the most-subsidized industry in America, and is perhaps the only product that the Arizona government forces people to buy regardless of cost or technological feasibility. Solar doesn’t yet make sense as a wide-spread energy policy, and the mandates vastly exceed the Commission’s rate-making authority. That is why the Goldwater Institute is challenging the rules in court and 51 legislators co-sponsored the bill that would repeal them.

So, the solar lobby invoked the one word that will make normally sensible elected officials do crazy things: jobs. Yes, Suntech will employ 75 people. But between the lavish subsidies and costly mandates these may be the most expensive jobs ever created. Nevertheless, the strategy eventually worked; the bill is dead for now.

Suntech’s Shaw claimed the bill would “obliterate the demand for solar,” which may be true if that demand primarily is government-created. Mandate-based industrial policy didn’t work out well in the Soviet Union and it won’t work in Arizona. What’s especially perplexing, though, are the supposedly “pro-market” politicians who think its time has come.

Arizona should stop spending more and more in a frenzied competition with other states over who can give the biggest subsidies to solar and instead create a favorable tax and regulatory climate for all businesses, large and small, in any industry.

Clint Bolick is director of the Goldwater Institute Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation.

by Byron Schlomach, Ph.D.
Goldwater Institute
 
Last week, the House Committee on Natural Resources and Rural Affairs approved HCR 2040, a measure that would refer yet another tax increase to Arizona voters. The proposal would require every Arizonan to pay an additional $12 for each license plate registration. The money would be directed to the state parks agency in an attempt to reopen some sites and to fund improvements at others.

HCR 2040 would establish this new tax at a time when few can afford the luxury of paying for other peoples’ recreation. Not everyone benefits from the state parks any more than everyone benefits when my family dines at a restaurant.

This new funding mechanism would place state parks in a position of unaccountable financial independence somewhat similar to the state transportation department and the new Early Childhood Development & Health Board. Self-funded agencies often are not particularly responsive to those they are supposed to serve.

One of the biggest complaints from legislators as they work on the state budget this week revolves around Proposition 105, the 1998 initiative that protects voter-approved spending. The repeated excuse for failing to respond to falling tax revenues has been that much of the spending is off-limits to legislators.

HCR 2040 would make this problem worse, placing more of a financial burden on Arizonans that cannot be easily offset and would further erode our tax-paying capacity. Tax revenues should be spent according to current circumstances and constitutional limits, not momentary whims that later become inflexible mandates.

There is another solution on the table to keep parks open: let private companies manage them and pay the state for the privilege. Last week Fox News commentator Glenn Beck interviewed a local business owner who wants the opportunity to keep our parks open. Until the legislature gives this idea a fair shake, a tax increase shouldn’t even be discussed.

Dr. Byron Schlomach is an economist and the director of the Center for Economic Prosperity at the Goldwater Institute.

The deadline for filing a ballot argument against the Brewer Tax is TOMORROW, Thursday, February 25, at 5:00 p.m.  For $75, you can tell three million of your fellow voters why an 18-percent increase in state sales taxes will be bad for you, your family, and your business.  Your argument will appear in the ballot pamphlet that goes out to voters before the May 18 election.

PLEASE ACT QUICKLY:  Your words could STOP a billion-dollar sales tax hike!

Here’s the order of operations:

1) Write up a Word document with an argument that is less than 300 words, including your name.  (Don’t cut it close to 300 words—leave room for a bad word count.)  Include the words “Argument Against Proposition 100” at the top. Put your address at the bottom.

I’m sure you have plenty of ideas, but here are more:

http://www.americansforprosperity.org/022310-some-arguments-against-prop-100-aka-brewer-tax

Here is a link to my personal argument against Prop 100:

http://www.americansforprosperity.org/files/jenneyargumentagainst100.pdf

If those links don’t work, go to www.aztaxpayers.org and Scroll down to What’s New.

Note that I filed it as an individual (with an individual check, and my individual address listed), rather than as the officer of an organization. Technically, they want two signatures, if your letter is supposed to represent an organization.

2) Print it out, but wait to sign and date it until you get to a notary (there is a notary at the Elections office of the AZ Secretary of State, and YOU HAVE TO GO TO THEIR OFFICE, so that is a more efficient way to do it).

3) Email the finished Word document (the exact version you printed) to elections@azsos.gov

4) Bring the printed copy and a check for $75 (made to “Arizona Secretary of State”) to the AZ SOS office before 5:00 pm today or tomorrow (Thursday, February 25).

How to get to the AZ SOS office in downtown Phoenix:

From the East or from Routes 51, 60 or 202: Get on I-10 westbound. Get off of I-10 at 19th Avenue, go south past Adams and make a left on Washington, then make a right into the big parking lot. If you get to the light at Jefferson, you’ll have to go left, and then make a left into the big parking lot. The AZ SOS office is in the nine-story tower building east of the parking lot. If you have any weapons, leave them in your car, because you’ll have to go through security. Go through security and go up in one of the elevators to the right (south). The SOS phone number is (602) 542-8683.

From the west and from I-17 north: At the I-10/I-17 interchange, take I-17 southbound. Get off of I-17 at Jefferson Avenue, and go east. After the light at 19th Avenue, make your first left into the big parking lot. The AZ SOS office is in the nine-story tower building east of the parking lot. If you have any weapons, leave them in your car, because you’ll have to go through security. Go through security and go up in one of the elevators to the right (south). The SOS phone number is (602) 542-8683.

Map: http://www.mapquest.com/maps?city=Phoenix&state=AZ&address=1900+W+Adams+St&zipcode=85009-5241&country=US&latitude=33.449199&longitude=-112.100298&geocode=ADDRESS

5) Get off on the 7th Floor, and go to the window. The friendly and courteous SOS staff will assist you with getting your signature notarized. They will also do a word count. When your argument is approved, they will give you a photocopy of your signed and notarized argument and your check.

I’m sorry about the late notice, and like you, I am annoyed that people have to file the arguments in person, in downtown Phoenix (makes it easy for the lobbyists and state workers to file, but hard for the average Joe).

For Liberty, Tom

Tom Jenney
Arizona Director
Americans for Prosperity
(Arizona Federation of Taxpayers)
www.aztaxpayers.org
tjenney@afphq.org
(602) 478-0146

To: poster #2 on the Konopnicki swap with Allen story (PCbutnotPC). Since you said Konopnicki has something to offer it got us to wondering and we found this little gem. What we really thought was interesting was the food tax proposal and in the video, a hospital bed tax proposal. Yes, Konopnicki does have something to offer … but isn’t leadership putting your name on your work?

Arizona lawmakers review Mystery Alternative Budget Proposal

By Paul Davenport

PHOENIX (AP) – Arizona legislators are examining and debating an alternative budget-balancing proposal whose origin remains somewhat murky.

The proposal widely circulating at the Capitol in recent weeks has been called a bipartisan alternative to Republican Gov. Jan Brewer’s budget proposal, skipping her spending cuts while using significantly more tax increases and borrowing.

Brewer’s plan is the basis for a legislative budget proposal that majority Republicans are drafting behind closed doors.

Several legislators have voiced support for parts of the alternative while acknowledging involvement in 2009 discussions leading to its preparation.

Republican Rep. Bill Konopnicki of Safford has told The Associated Press he personally paid $2,000 to a retired California university economist to help compile the proposal.

However, none of those lawmakers accepted invitations to discuss the proposal Thursday during a joint House-Senate briefing to compare it with Brewer’s offering, said House Appropriations Committee Chairman John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills.

That left Kavanagh and several other senior Republicans complaining they don’t know the alternative proposal’s true origins and couldn’t ask questions to its drafter or drafters about its revenue assumptions and specific provisions.

“If they can’t put on their big-boy pants … and take responsibility for the plan they’re trying to implement, then they must not really believe in them,” said Rep. Rick Murphy, R-Glendale.

http://www.azpbs.org/horizon/play.php?vidId=1704

[does anyone remember watching Horizon on PBS on Feb. 2, 2010?]

Kavanagh said he won’t spend more time on the alternative because issues as important as the budget require more transparency.

“It’s a real threat to the institutional process. This committee is not a hotel where you book a room and bring in whoever you want,” he said.

However, several other lawmakers, including Democrats and at least one Republican, said their colleagues should keep the door open and not reject the alternative proposal out of hand.

“We have a culture that doesn’t encourage people to step out and try to find ideas that are out of the box,” said Rep. Vic Williams, R-Tucson.

Responded Senate Appropriations Chairman Russell Pearce: “I’m not sure I’m finding any gems here. It’s $3 billion of taxing.”  Pearce, R-Mesa, at one point said parts of the alternative proposal mirrored a budget spreadsheet linked to an Arizona State University administrator.

But ASU officials have denied involvement, Pearce said.  The university official named by Pearce, Richard Stanley, did not immediately respond to a query e-mailed to him by the AP.

By raising your automobile license fees by $9 per vehicle per year… from the Payson Round-Up:

… state Rep. Bill Konopnicki and others have introduced a bill that would add $9 to the vehicle license fees to fund state parks.  The surcharge on license fees would also give state drivers free entrance to the state park system, prevent the Legislature from diverting entrance fees and provide enough money to keep the state parks system operating.

Konopnicki’s vehicle license fee charge could provide a long-term solution to the problems of the whole system, if it makes it through the Legislature.  “The parks system is currently operating on about $21 million,” said Konopnicki, “but they really need about $30 million. This should generate better than that.”  Konopnicki said it would be foolish to shut down the state parks system for lack of operating funds, considering the economic benefits the system yields —

So were local public and private solutions entertained by the State Parks Administration?  What do you think?  Payson offered to take over operation of the local state park and were shut down when the counter offer from Parks included an up front charge of over $1,000,000.

Imagine the economic boost locally if a state park was partially privatized and partially operated locally?  Guess they’ll never find out.

Bottom Line?  The state agency wasn’t interested in finding solutions and used the “scare and squeeze” tradition preached by Representative Konopnicki as a ploy to increase fee revenues to continue spending.

Scare and Squeeze … just what the Phoenix Police Union is doing to get the 2% tax on your food, and Mr. Konopnicki is the King of Welfare for failing local governments and state agencies.

By Byron Schlomach, Ph.D.
Goldwater Institute
 
I recently attended a meeting with Maurice McTigue, director of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, a former member of the New Zealand Parliament, and a man with wide experience in government reform. Attendance at the meeting, arranged by State Senator Sylvia Allen, should have been required for everyone in our state government.

Prior to comprehensive reforms 20 years ago, New Zealand was an economic mess, suffering from debt, continual deficits, and a stagnating economy. Out of desperation, New Zealand’s political leaders reduced government spending and enacted fundamental, wide-ranging reform. Since then, New Zealand’s national government has seen a single deficit; it was this year and due to the worldwide recession.

One instructive example given by Mr. McTigue concerned agriculture subsidies, which, among other things, were artificially inflating land prices. Everybody knew land prices would collapse when those subsidies ended. Some estimated 31 percent of farmers and at least seven major banks would go bankrupt. Yet, with no bailout or any other government involvement, only one-half of 1 percent of farmers went bankrupt. And not a single bank went under.

An outbreak of “spontaneous economic order,” as Mr. McTigue described it, resulted. Banks re-valued loans to avoid defaults. Farmers renegotiated payment schedules. People figured out how to navigate the changing economy without government intervention.

This example may seem most applicable to federal financial policies in response to the U.S. real estate meltdown; but, the lesson is broader. We commonly hear stories that if Arizona cuts spending on parks or education or health care, our economy will collapse. Yet New Zealand’s experience illustrates that fundamental reform, rethinking, and shrinking of government should be welcomed, not feared.

Byron Schlomach, Ph.D., is the director of the Goldwater Institute’s Center for Economic Prosperity.

by Clint Bolick 
Goldwater Institute

The Arizona Governor’s office is up for grabs and lots of people seem to want it. As someone who enjoys suing politicians but doesn’t aspire to be one, I offer the following platform for candidates to confront the challenges and opportunities facing our state–namely, the three E’s:
 
Enterprise. Arizona should become the most business-friendly state in the nation, by lowering taxes and curbing unnecessary regulations and red-tape. The state should get out of the corporate welfare business, in which it tries to out-guess the market and compete with other states to see who can give away the most taxpayer money to attract the latest hot industry. Instead, a level playing field hospitable to all businesses will not only attract and retain big corporations but will nurture entrepreneurs and small businesses, which are the economy’s catalysts.
 
Education. As my colleague Matt Ladner has chronicled, Arizona’s public education system is dragging down the state, our children, and our future. We need fundamental stem-to-stern reform that uses technology to provide the best individualized education to every child. Charter schools, distance learning, performance-based pay, expanded parental choice, and transforming school districts and education bureaucrats into service providers are key components of comprehensive reform that can lead the nation.
 
Efficiency. Our state’s budget crisis teaches us that we must reform government to prevent such crises from ever happening again. Privatization of government services, ensuring that future spending will not exceed population growth plus inflation, adopting a balanced budget requirement, and greater fiscal transparency at every level of government are steps we should take now to ensure future fiscal responsibility.
 
The governor that pursues these three E’s will propel our state toward greatness while preserving our freedom.

Clint Bolick is director of the Goldwater Institute Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation.

By Byron Schlomach, Ph.D.
Goldwater Institute 
 
On January 11, Chile was officially invited to join the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Chile will be the OECD’s 31st member and its first from South America. The OECD is largely made up of the world’s richest and most stable economies and Chile’s invitation to join the club wasn’t always a given.

In the early 1970s, Chile’s economy was a basket case not unlike Haiti’s before last week’s earthquake. Abject poverty, rampant inflation, and high unemployment were the norm. There is no denying that Augusto Pinochet was a detestable tyrant, but he did one thing right after he took control of the country: he turned economic policy over to 10 Chilean economists who had been trained at the University of Chicago in the theories of John Locke and Nobel Prize winning economists F.A. Hayek and Milton Friedman.

The government began selling government-owned businesses, deregulating enterprises, and removing wage and price controls. In 1981, Chile’s social security system was privatized under the direction of Jose Pinera, who was given the Goldwater Award for Liberty in 2003 and is the brother of Chile’s just-elected President Sebastian Pinera. These economic policies set the stage for Chile to become South America’s most vibrant and successful economy.

Chile’s economic experience could be instructive to Arizona policymakers. Government-owned enterprises like stadiums and Phoenix’s Sheraton Hotel have become too common. The state still owns huge swaths of land that ought to be sold and put to use creating jobs. The state should also loosen regulations on wages. Arizona has the potential to create the most vibrant economy of any state in the union. We just need to be freed to exercise it.

Byron Schlomach, Ph.D., is the director of the Goldwater Institute’s Center for Economic Prosperity.

Byron Schlomach, Ph.D.
Goldwater Institute

Arizona state parks continue to make news and be used as a pawn in the budget chess game. Budget reductions approved by the legislature in December will likely result in some park closures. Parks that make money like Kartchner Caverns, Slide Rock, and Lake Havasu will stay open, while money losers will close. Many legislators continue to decry budget reductions to the Parks department, but also refuse to look at realistic alternatives.

I recently received a letter from Warren Meyer, the president of Recreation Resource Management, a Phoenix-based company that manages parks for a wide array of government agencies. His letter says that the parks slated for closure “could easily be kept open” under the management of a company like his. Not only would the parks be kept open, the companies would pay the state for the opportunity to manage them. The parks would actually make money for the state. Not a bad deal considering we’re $4 billion in the red.

Mr. Meyer writes that he’s been encouraging the Parks Department to consider this option for years to no avail. That means there has been a money saving option on the table for years that the legislature and career bureaucrats at the Parks Department have refused to consider.

There are a multitude of options for preserving our parks that don’t require taxpayer funding. For example, instead of keeping Jerome’s Davis Mansion closed, do a long-term lease and preserve it by letting it be operated as a bed and breakfast. Some parks and museums could go the way of the Museum of the Horse Soldier in Tucson, where you can see a life-size horse mannequin wearing a WWI horse gas mask, artifacts from Arizona forts, uniforms, weapons, and saddles back to the civil war. Admission is $2.00 and it’s privately owned and operated. The owner doubtlessly loses money on his priceless collection, yet there it is, and taxpayers aren’t required to spend a dime.

The Morrison Institute has suggested raising license plate fees by $15 to fund the parks, but that is unnecessary. Legislators need to consider all of the options before them and choose those that reduce government spending obligations so that we can begin to climb out of our fiscal hole.

Byron Schlomach, Ph.D., is the director of the Goldwater Institute’s Center for Economic Prosperity.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 12, 2010

Goddard & Dems Choose Partisanship Over Statesmanship
Goddard Patronizes Women in Public Service and Remains Unwilling to Help Solve State’s Challenges

PHOENIX –– Attorney General Terry Goddard was disappointed in Governor Brewer’s State of the State speech yesterday. One of his biggest concerns? Brewer’s speech didn’t identify state and legislative leaders by their party label or focus on their differences in ideology.

According to the Arizona Capitol Times Yellow Sheet Report, Goddard is quoted saying, “I was waiting for the words, ‘bipartisan effort’ and they never came out… I found that very surprising given the extraordinary challenges we have.”

What is more surprising is that Goddard missed Brewer’s call for everyone to “gather in the field” and to “be honest with each other and worthy of the trust” that all elected officials have been granted by the voters.

“Statesmen solve problems, politicians call for bipartisanship,” replied former Attorney General Grant Woods, “Who did he think the Governor was referring to when she said ‘we’ 74 times and ‘us’ 19 times throughout the speech? Ignoring the rallying cry for everyone to work together is just playing politics. As his party’s presumptive gubernatorial nominee, Terry needs to come out of his shell and productively engage by offering solutions, not tired political rhetoric.”

In today’s Arizona Republic, Goddard personally insulted the Governor and her office as “That poor lady” and was reportedly disappointed with the Governor’s “tone.”

“As a woman who has dedicated a significant portion of my life to public service, I take offense to Goddard’s condescending tone,” said former U.S. Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters. “The Governor has 28 years of experience in serving the public has shown strong leadership and strength in guiding the state through one of the toughest times in its history. Instead of recognizing that, Goddard dismisses and disrespects her and the office she holds.”

While Brewer did not mention political party a single time in her speech, Democratic leadership felt compelled to make partisanship front and center in their response referring to “Republicans” and “Democrats” nearly a dozen times in their press conference after the Governor’s address.

“Last year, Democratic leaders failed to provide a single vote for Arizona’s needed budget cuts after ratcheting up the spending and have stood silent on federal unfunded mandates and federal attempts to violate state’s rights protected by the Constitution,” said Doug Cole, spokesman for the Brewer Campaign, “Now they are hiding behind partisan rhetoric to shift the blame for the problem they caused while failing to be part of the solution. It is not acceptable leadership at this critical time in our state’s history to wait in the weeds until its safe to come out. Where’s his plan?”

As is customary, the Governor will release her detailed budget plan this Friday.

Arizona Democratic legislative leadership and Goddard watched as former Governor Napolitano rapidly expanded government and drove the state to near collapse and did nothing about it. Now that the problem must be solved, they are decrying cuts to the Government they have worked so hard to grow.

In their press conference, House Assistant Minority Leader Kyrsten Sinema spoke out against the Governor’s proposal for a voter-approved rollback of the Prop 204 Medicaid expansion. She proceeded to called Prop 204–with a price tag of $1 billion to Arizona’s deficit–a “middle class entitlement.” Sinema also admitted that “the cost of healthcare is too high for businesses and employees,” but offered no solution as to how Arizona should cover the short-fall to Medicaid or the additional burden that Obama’s healthcare plan would place on Arizona.

Brewer made an open request to all in her State of the State speech: “Tell us clearly how you would solve a $5 billion problem over the next 17 months. The suggestion box is wide open.”

When asked by reporters yesterday why no Democrats’ plan was ever introduced as a bill last year, House Democrat Leader David Lujan stated that they do not put their budget ideas into legislation until they have a majority–a convenient response for why the untenable plan they offered last session never saw the legislative light of day.

“What has to be done for the state of Arizona is beyond partisanship rhetoric. As Jan Brewer said, this is about doing what is right. If Goddard or any of the other Democrats have a solution, I recommend they take up the Governor’s offer and draft their ideas now and put them in legislation,” concluded Mary Peters. “We don’t need more insults and a ‘wait and see’ attitude. I encourage them to replace rhetoric with an actual plan on paper instead of having to wait for their opinion until after something is passed like their solution for Obamacare. Otherwise, all of the complaining will continue to ring false.”

####