You are here: Home / Archives for State Government

Arizona Democrat Rep Linda Lopez attacks Republicans as members of Taliban

March 22, 2012 By 5 Comments

Watch as Arizona Democrat lawmaker, State Rep Linda Lopez, lies to the media about a piece of legislation, HB 2625, and then calls Republicans members of the Taliban.

YouTube Preview Image

Let’s remember that Linda Lopez has been a longtime advocate and sponsor or legislation that would force doctors to euthanize patients.

Contact State Rep Lopez and demand that she apologize for her statement.

Also demand that Linda Lopez attend mandatory remedial training at the University of Arizona’s National Institute for Civil Discourse.

YouTube Preview Image
Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Culture, Elected Officials, Legislation, Liberals, Political Correctness, Political Parties, State Government Tagged With: , ,

Keeping up with the speed of virtual education

March 22, 2012 By 4 Comments

By Jonathan Butcher

In 1947, military experts were trying to build an aircraft that wouldn’t lose control at high speeds so a pilot could fly faster than the speed of sound. Pilots were afraid to accelerate beyond the sound barrier for fear they would never recover control of their plane.

Chuck Yeager, then a 24-year-old test pilot, took the challenge in an experimental aircraft and broke the sound barrier on October 14. “There was no buffet, no jolt, no shock. Above all, no brick wall to smash into,” Yeager told Popular Mechanics 40 years later.

Arizona legislators have the opportunity to cross another invisible boundary. SB 1259, sponsored by Sen. Rich Crandall, helps students move as fast as the speed of virtual education. While there is much we do not know about virtual education and we can’t anticipate all possible consequences, online education is a part of the 21st century’s educational landscape. The question is not whether students will take courses online but how they can access classes and how many they can take.

SB 1259 creates a system for Arizona to approve courses, direct funding, and test student mastery.

The bill considers several elements necessary for a sound system of quality online options and parental choice:

  1. Choice: The program allows students in grades 7-12 to take up to 2 courses online in core subjects required for graduation.
  2. Funding: The bill funds schools partly based on student performance. Virtual providers will need to prepare students for end-of-course assessments in order to receive full funding for each student.
  3. Quality: Parents will review their child’s experience, and the reviews will be made public in order to help others consider their options.

Online learning holds the potential to provide new opportunities to all students. SB 1259 begins to create a structure for digital learning, and not a moment too soon.

Jonathan Butcher is Education Director for the Goldwater Institute. 

Learn more:

Goldwater Institute: Cane Toads, Virtual Schools, and Unintended Consequences

Arizona State Legislature: SB 1259

Popular Mechanics: Gen. Chuck Yeager Describes How He Broke the Sound Barrier

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Education, State Government

Paul Boyer Runs For Open House Seat In LD10 (Glendale) – Earns Key Endorsements

March 21, 2012 By 2 Comments

(Glendale, AZ) – Former House Majority staffer Paul Boyer is running for the open House in Legislative District 10 (Glendale/North Phoenix), the new district 20.

“Paul has been a tremendous asset to the House of Representatives,” Representative Kimberly Yee said. “I know he’s wanted to run for the state legislature for several years but he had the conviction of first ensuring he had solid experience behind him in addition to having an open seat to run for. So I’m thankful one has finally opened up and I look forward to working with him now as a Member.”

Boyer has received key endorsements from Congressman Trent Franks, Corporation Commissioners Bob Stump and Brenda Burns, Phoenix City Councilman Jim Waring, State Representatives Kimberly Yee (District 10), Debbie Lesko (District 9), Speaker Pro Tem Steve Montenegro (District 12),
Majority Leader Steve Court (District 18),
Representative Rick Gray (District 9),
 J.D. Mesnard (District 21), John Kavanagh (District 8), Justin Olson (District 19), Amanda Reeve (District 6), David Stevens (District 25),
David Gowan (District 30), Heather Carter (District 7), Karen Fann (District 1), Doris Goodale (District 3), Chester Crandell (District 5), Brenda Barton (District 5) and Tom Forese (District 21), Senators John McComish (District 20), Rick Murphy (District 9), and Michele Reagan (District 8).

“I’m honored to receive the overwhelming support of Representative Yee and so many within the Capitol community,” Boyer said. “I had the pleasure of working with Representative Yee during these last two years and with her help, I will continue her great work of promoting economic development through free enterprise and protecting life.”

# # #

About Paul Boyer
Paul spent three years as legislative liaison with the Arizona Department of Corrections before becoming a policy advisor and communications specialist for Republicans in the State House of Representatives.

Paul is anArizonanative who grew up in theWestValley, attendedDeerValleyhigh school, and graduated Magna Cum Laude from ASU West with a Bachelors in English and a Masters in Communication Studies. He is now working on a Masters of Philosophy at ASU with the end goal of a PhD in Analytic Philosophy. Paul is currently Supervisor of District Communications for Mesa Public Schools.

He is also a proud recipient of an Arizona Capitol Times’ Best of the Capitol award for 2011.

Filed Under: Campaigns & Elections, Press Release, State Government Tagged With:

Have you actually read Arizona’s HB 2625?

March 20, 2012 By 80 Comments

The left has decided to wage a war on conservatives and people of conscience by using a bill at the Arizona Legislature that distracts and misinforms. In case you get accosted by one of these leftist zombies, ask them one simple question: “Have you read the bill?”

And in case you haven’t read the bill, here is the current version of the bill:

 

Filed Under: Legislation, State Government Tagged With:

Debbie Lesko: HB 2625 legislation lets employers opt out

March 20, 2012 By 1 Comment

By Debbie Lesko

My legislation to protect our First Amendment rights does one thing and one thing alone: It allows an employer to opt out of a current government mandate that forces it to include the morning-after pill and contraceptives in its insurance benefits even if it is against the employer’s religious beliefs.

Employers can opt out if, and only if, they have a religious objection. It does not authorize employers to ask or know about their employees’ contraceptive use, and it does not allow employers to fire anyone for that use.

The Catholic Church and other faith-based organizations support my legislation, and a national legal organization helped write the law.

Ironically, the controversy about my bill revolves around current law — not even anything I introduced.

In current law, the prescription is still covered if it is used for something other than contraception and the insurance company, not the employer, knows that information.

Whether my legislation passes or not, that will still be the law.

Protecting our First Amendment rights is one of the most important things we can do.  America’s future is at stake.

State Representative Debbie Lesko currently represents legislative district 9 and serves in the Arizona House as majority whip.

Additional Facts:

HB 2625 will:

  1. Allow an employer to opt out of the current government mandate that forces them to cover in their insurance plans abortion-inducing drugs and other items related to contraception…even if they must violate their religious beliefs. The mandate violates the 1st Amendment right of freedom of religion. The employer can opt out, if and only if, they have a religious objection.
  2. It does NOT authorize an employer to ask or know anything about their employee’s contraceptive use.
  3. It does NOT authorize an employer to fire an employee for that use.
  4. Was written by the Alliance Defense Fund, a national legal organization, that fights for religious freedoms.
  5. Is supported by the Catholic church and other faith-based organizations.
Filed Under: Elected Officials, Guest Opinion, Jobs/Labor, Legislation, State Government Tagged With: ,

Sunshine Is the Best Disinfectant – Even on Campus

March 20, 2012 By 1 Comment

By Carrie Ann Sitren

As national Sunshine Week comes to a close, some legislators are trying to close out the sunshine. A new proposal would expand a current exemption to Arizona’s Public Records Laws and limit public information at universities.

Private research groups and ASU are spearheading the effort to keep more of their research private. Current law already protects some intellectual property and trade secrets from being released to the public so that competitors cannot copy university research before it is copyrighted. But the groups are trying to expand the protections to protect information in all university contracts that merely contain a statement of confidentiality.

This means that a contract between the university and any employee, consultant, or any other private group or individual can be kept out of public view. However, courts have already determined that a public body cannot contract out of its duty to disclose public records. Instead, the public has a right to monitor the government’s activities, including university contracts and research. That right is guaranteed by Arizona’s Public Records Laws.

The new proposal further proclaims an emergency, stating that it must be passed immediately in order to preserve the public peace, health or safety. It is difficult to imagine such an urgent need to limit public access to university records, or why the normal procedure for passing new legislation isn’t perfectly adequate.

Whatever the research groups and universities are trying to accomplish, the proposed legislation stretches too broadly and attempts to rush through a significant limitation on the public’s right to access information of public importance. If the current protections should be expanded at all, they should be tailored to address specific problems that are not met by existing law and thoughtfully considered with an eye towards letting in the sunshine.

Carrie Ann Sitren is an attorney with the Goldwater Institute’s Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation.

Learn more:

Arizona State Legislature: HB 2272 (PDF)

Arizona Daily Sun: Use Sunshine Week to Insist on Open Government Records

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Constitutional Law, Legislation, State Government

Local Control – Sometimes

March 19, 2012 By 5 Comments

By Clint Bolick

Whenever local bureaucrats or special-interest groups want to neutralize conservative legislators, one of their most-potent weapons is two words: “local control.”

If the Legislature wants to curb excessive taxes, demand transparency, end union give-aways, align election dates, or anything that trenches on the power of local government, “local control” is the argument of choice to stymie reform — and it often succeeds.

The notion that the best government is the government closest to home is embedded in the American tradition. It conjures nostalgic images of town-hall meetings and other forms of civic engagement.

But the reality is that many local governments have grown large and distant from their citizens. Few voters are engaged in local elections — in part because they often occur on random dates. And newer types of local governments, such as special districts and regional authorities, are experiencing explosive growth yet are almost completely immune to democratic constraints.

What’s worse, local governments often are manipulated by special interests, especially unions. Our Constitution’s framers predicted this. “The smaller the society, the smaller probably will be the distinct parties and interests composing it,” warned James Madison in The Federalist No. 10, making it easier for special interests to “concert and execute their plans of oppression.”

Our national government derives its powers from the states. So too do local governments, which possess only those powers expressly conferred by the state. Local and state government powers are intended to balance and constrain each other, so as to protect freedom.

Local governments affect our daily lives more than any other — from police and fire to schools, property and business regulations, and the most basic public services. Protections at the state level against local overreach are both essential and appropriate.

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

Learn more:

Goldwater Institute: It’s Time to Burst the Special-Interest Election Bubble

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Campaigns & Elections, City Government, Constitutional Law, County Government, Government Reform, State Government

Arizona must choose the right path on tax policy

March 15, 2012 By 2 Comments

By Stephen Slivinski

On March 12, the state senate in Oklahoma passed a bill that would immediately turn the state’s income tax into a flat tax, cut the tax rate in half, and strip away the extraneous tax credits and special carve-outs. Then, over a 10-year period, it would slowly phase the income tax out of existence by cutting the rates each year until they reach zero.

Meanwhile, in Arizona, special interests filed a ballot initiative for November that would extend the “temporary” sales tax increase passed by voters in 2010. Additionally, the initiative will lock-in automatic future increases in education spending, burdening taxpayers with ever-higher tax bills. Passage of this initiative will also guarantee that Arizona’s average state and local sales tax rate remains the second highest in the nation.

There is another path, however. The Speaker’s “jobs bill” (HB 2815), which has already passed the House, would eliminate the capital gains tax in Arizona, something no state with an income tax has yet done. In addition, the House has also passed HB 2123, which creates a tax-reform commission that will consider proposals to eliminate the income tax altogether, and issue recommendations by October.

This year, voters and policymakers will have a clear choice on what path tax policy in Arizona should take. Should we choose the path of high tax rates, a tax base with all sorts of special carve-outs, and business as usual at the Capitol? Or should we choose the path that lowers tax rates, makes the tax code more sane, and sets the state up for robust job growth and entrepreneurial activity that could make the state an economic powerhouse?

The choice is clear. Oklahoma has taken its first step down the right path. Arizona should too.

Stephen Slivinski is a senior economist with the Goldwater Institute.

Learn more:

Wall Street Journal: The Heartland Tax Rebellion

Oklahoma State Senate: Statement on the Passage of Tax Reform Bill SB 1571

Goldwater Institute: Unleashing Entrepreneurial Forces: States Can Spark Business Creation, Attract Venture Capital Investment, and Increase Job Growth by Eliminating Taxation of Capital Gains

Goldwater Institute: Investing in Arizona: How the Legislature Can Get Arizona’s Economy Moving Again by Reducing the Barriers to Investment and Job Creation

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Economic Development, Economics, State Budget, State Economy, State Government, Taxation

Education Savings Account Expansion Will Help Hispanic Students

March 14, 2012 By 5 Comments

By Jonathan Butcher

Every student in a failing school should have better options. In Arizona, the largest failing schools enroll a high concentration of Hispanic students— students that, nationally, are at a high risk of dropping out and have low college attendance rates. Among the 20 largest public schools that received a “D” on their state report card, 71 percent of the students are Hispanic. (see chart here)

HB 2626 expands Arizona’s education savings account program to students in failing schools (along with children in military families and academically gifted students). This measure will offer options to many parents, especially in Hispanic communities.

State Sen. Steve Gallardo was quoted in the Arizona Republic last week saying the savings account program is “not aimed toward Hispanic kids” and that “White Republicans” have done “nothing” to help “Hispanic kids go to college.” These data on Arizona’s failing schools coupled with the proposed expansion of education savings accounts to students in “D” schools suggest the opposite.

Christina Martinez, representing the Hispanic Council for Reform and Educational Options (HCREO) and the U.S. Hispanic Leadership Institute, testified in support of HB 2626 last week. “We know that only about 50 percent of Latinos finish high school on time and only 13 percent of Latinos will go on to college,” she said. “We believe many of these instances are due to an educational environment that is not conducive to the needs of the student.”

“And because of this, we feel that if the system is failing, a student’s parents should have the option to enroll their child in a setting that is conducive. Furthermore, they should be able to use any and all resources available to them,” Martinez said.

Expanding education savings accounts to students in failing schools will help those students most in need of more options.

Jonathan Butcher is the education director for the Goldwater Institute.

Learn more:

Arizona State Legislature: Arizona Senate Finance Committee video, March 8, 2012

Arizona Republic: Democratic lawmaker opposes use of cute Latino kids

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Education, State Government

Rewarding the Worthy, Removing the Worthless

March 13, 2012 By 3 Comments

by Farrell Quinlan

Have you ever been confronted, confounded and stymied by a state bureaucrat who refuses to do his or her job?

Every small business owner has his or her story (or stories) about the government employee or agency regulator who has this attitude that screams, “I’m on my seventh governor—they come and go and like with them, I can just wait you out.”

A significant chunk of small business owners’ frustrations with the bureaucracy can properly be placed on miserable individuals rather than on foolish or short-sided rules. Often it’s the entrenched middle managers in state employ who use and abuse their discretion within a regulatory environment to give government a bad name. Sometimes arrogance is to blame. Other times it’s incompetence. Mostly, both are actively in play.

There’s a reason government isn’t run like a business. It just isn’t set up that way.

But is there really nothing to be done to improve the situation?

Happily, there is plenty that can be done to make state government more accountable, more responsive and even a better place to work that rewards high performance.

Gov. Jan Brewer and pair of lawmakers named Justin are spearheading legislation to overhaul our state government’s personnel system. House Bill 2571 seeks to:

  • Consolidate multiple personnel systems;
  • Transition the state to an at-will workforce;
  • Improve the management of the state workforce;
  • Restructure the grievance and appeal system; and,
  • Update human resources practices.

The core of this long-overdue reform is to turn away from a sclerotic system that tends to bend over backwards to protect bad employees while it cavalierly discourages good employees by keeping them from achieving the rewards and pay they deserve for serving the taxpayers well.

About 80 percent of Arizona state workers are “covered” employees with the remaining 20 percent being “uncovered” or at-will employees like those in the private sector. That means four out of five state bureaucrats are protected from the normal considerations and expectations demanded from those working outside of government.

Try firing the lazy, insubordinate and incompetent in an environment where they can appeal their demotion, discipline or dismissal to a board that can, and far too often, overturns the decision of the executive responsible for the action.

No business could succeed or survive under these rules. Is it any wonder why our state government underperforms?

Rep. Justin Olson

Leading Governor Brewer’s reform movement in the Arizona Legislature are Rep. Justin Olson and Rep. Justin Pierce, both from Mesa. After fours years of implementation, their HB 2571 will completely flip the state workforce’s ratio to 18 percent covered and 82 percent at-will employees while maintaining necessary protections for full authority public safety officers.

HB 2571 sets up a state personnel system for Arizona with the following guiding principles:

  • Recruit and select employees on the basis of their ability, knowledge and skills after open competition;
  • Provide compensation based on merit, performance, job value and competitiveness with the labor market;
  • Train employees on the basis of their performance, correct inadequate performance where possible, and separate employees whose performance in inadequate;
  • Manage applicants and employees without regard to political affiliation, race, color, national origin, sex, age, disability or religious creed; and,
  • Assure that employees are protected against coercion for partisan political purposes.

These principles will provide a firm foundation to build a state workforce that respects and serves the taxpayers who fund it. This reform creates the mechanisms to reward the worthy and remove the worthless. HB 2571 deserves and has the support of Arizona small business owners and of NFIB.

Contact your Senator and Representatives
Ask them to support HB 2571: State Personnel Reform

Farrell Quinlan is Arizona state director for the National Federation of Independent Business, the voice of small business with 7,500 small business members in Arizona.

UPDATE: HB 2571 passed the Arizona House of Representatives on Wednesday, March 14th on a 39-19 vote. The Arizona Senate now takes up the legislation. Further changes are expected to the legislation meaning a final House vote will be necessary later this session. Please continue to contact your legislators in both the House and Senate until this important reform is sent to the Governor for her signature.

Filed Under: Government, Government Reform, Legislation, Regulations, Small Business, State Government Tagged With: , , , ,

Pachyderm Legislator Evaluation Weekly Update Available

March 13, 2012 By Leave a Comment

 

 

 

The Pachyderm Coalition Republican legislator evaluations are available here.

Take a look at how your legislators are doing.

 

Filed Under: Elected Officials, Government, State Government Tagged With: ,

Support Public Pension Reform

March 13, 2012 By 4 Comments

by Byron Schlomach, Ph.D.

I’ll be blunt. Last year’s tepid reforms to the state’s pension systems were not enough.

Those reforms were probably about as far as the legislature could go and keep the pension systems in place for all future and existing public employees. But the only reform that can begin to dig us out of the financial hole pension systems represent would move all new employees to 401(k) plans. So far, that has been more than the legislature has wanted to bite off.

In the meantime, even the modest reforms passed last year have been under legal assault. The state recently lost a lawsuit in its bid to require employees in the Arizona State Retirement System (ASRS) to contribute a greater share of the pension system’s costs. Another lawsuit by judges would block any increases in their share of pension system costs and block modest limits on cost of living adjustments.

Judges participate in the Elected Official Retirement Plan (EORP) where employee contributions have been held to 7 percent of salary for at least a decade. Meanwhile, taxpayers are now contributing an average rate of almost 30 percent of salary, up from 7 percent a mere 10 years ago.

At least ASRS participants see their contributions rise and fall with taxpayers’. These judges are insisting that they not face any of the risk of their own retirements, even while they are still working.

Representative Kavanagh has proposed HCR 2060, a constitutional amendment to explicitly allow increases in EORP member pension fund contributions and to allow reductions in cost of living adjustments. This is minimal protection for taxpayers, especially when the judges who decide whether reforms are legal have a conflict of interest with the taxpayers they are sworn to protect.

Dr. Byron Schlomach is the director of the Goldwater Institute’s Center for Economic Prosperity.

Learn more:

Arizona Capitol Times: Judge overturns Arizona pension law change

Arizona Republic: Put-upon judges to defend their cushy pensions — in court

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Economics, Elected Officials, Government Reform, Jobs/Labor, State Budget, State Economy, State Government

Arizona House Ethics Committee to take up Rep Daniel Patterson Investigation

March 9, 2012 By 3 Comments

196 days ago, Sonoran Alliance called for the Arizona State House Ethics Committee to conduct an investigation on the behavior of LD-29 State Representative Daniel Patterson. That hearing will finally take place next Tuesday – exactly 200 days from our initial call. (Read Agenda)

Not knowing who finally conceded to this request for the investigation, this blog expresses its appreciation to that person for finally allowing these hearings to take place.

Where this will lead, is still to be determined but we believe that an indictment is likely to ensue by law enforcement authorities any day.

The frustration in all of this should be obvious. Everyone was quick to jump on Republican State Senator Scott Bundgaard over an incident that took place alongside State Route 51 last February, but no one dared raise the same complaint (except this blog and The Three Sonorans) over State Representative Daniel Patterson.

There was a blatant double standard.

Next Tuesday, Daniel Patterson will finally be in the hot seat and if Republicans want to be intellectually consistent in their practice of governance, they will need to prove to Arizona that justice is not only blind but that it’s courageous.

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Crime and Punishment, Elected Officials, Ethics, State Government Tagged With: , , , ,

Time to End the ‘Meet and Confer’ Shakedown

March 7, 2012 By 1 Comment

by Nick Dranias

Government unions claim “meet and confer” collective bargaining only promotes innocent brainstorming between government employees and employers about work conditions. But in reality, as with any other collective bargaining law, meet and confer laws legalize a shakedown of the taxpayer.

Government Union InfographicLike a “discussion” conducted under the threat of a business “accident,” meet and confer laws ensure collective bargaining in Arizona is conducted under the very real threat of costly litigation. Such laws empower government unions to sue government employers for failing to negotiate in “good faith” whenever the employer refuses to yield to union demands. And government unions routinely sue government employers to meet their negotiating demands.

As a result, it should be no wonder that meet and confer collective bargaining costs Arizona taxpayers $550 million per year in outsized wages and unsustainable benefits. The legal compulsion leveraged by government unions is not offset by the fact that elected officials ultimately must approve the deal that is struck.

As the Arizona Republic reports, neither elected officials nor the media are able to monitor collective bargaining, which is typically kept secret by meet and confer laws. Elected officials rarely read or understand the hundreds of pages of labor agreements they must approve every year. And willful ignorance is encouraged by the fact government unions do not hesitate to threaten the political careers of elected officials unless they approve those agreements.

In the final analysis, meet and confer laws encourage government unions to apply legal and political force to control both sides of the bargaining table. This inevitably skews any negotiation over wages, benefits and work conditions to their advantage and to the detriment of the taxpayer—as evidenced by the outrageous phenomena of “release time,” in which union officials are put on the government payroll but work exclusively for the union.

Even if release time is banned or struck down, leaving the power of a legalized shakedown in the hands of government unions will only allow new abuses to take its place. Only a structural reform in the way government does business with unions can prevent such future abuses. For this reason, SB 1485’s total ban on government sector collective bargaining remains absolutely essential to protecting Arizona taxpayers from being fleeced by government unions.

Nick Dranias holds the Clarence J. and Katherine P. Duncan Chair for Constitutional Government and is director of the Joseph and Dorothy Donnelly Moller Center for Constitutional Government at the Goldwater Institute.

Learn more:

Goldwater Institute: Save Taxpayers Tens of Billions of Dollars

Arizona State Legislature: SB 1485

Arizona Republic: Surprise drops curtain on police, fire union negotiations

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Government Reform, Jobs/Labor, State Government

Cane Toads, Virtual Schools, and Unintended Consequences

February 29, 2012 By Leave a Comment

By Jonathan Butcher

In 1935, Australia had a problem with beetles. The bugs were destroying the nation’s sugar cane crop, so, to combat the pests, lawmakers introduced over 100 Cane Toads to the continent.

While the toads took care of the beetles, Australia now has 200 million Cane Toads and an ongoing problem controlling these amphibians. Cane Toads are poisonous and threaten many native species, including snakes and freshwater crocodiles.

“You cannot always predict the results of purposeful action,” writes Steven M. Gillon in That’s Not What We Meant to Do, a book describing the unintended consequences from many 20th century policies (he cites Australia’s toad problem as an illustration of how we need to be saved from our own solutions sometimes).

In Arizona, SB 1259 attempts to remedy a problem with the state’s virtual school funding system. Currently, virtual schools receive funding for each student that enrolls, even if the student does not master the material at the end of the course. SB 1259 creates a system similar to Florida’s Virtual School, wherein the school receives a sizable percentage of its funding only after a student completes a course and can demonstrate what they have learned.

However, SB 1259 creates an incentive for virtual schools to give all students at least a C-, the mark at which a student has to score in order for the school to receive 85 percent of student funding. Grade inflation could become an unintended consequence of the measure.

SB 1259 addresses important parts of the virtual school law and shows the state’s policies are maturing. But lawmakers will have to watch for unintended consequences and be prepared to revise the measure so that it appropriately fits the world of online education.

Jonathan Butcher is the Education Director for the Goldwater Institute.

Learn more:

Education Next: Florida’s Online Option

Arizona State Legislature: SB 1259

Australian Government: Policy on Cane Toads (PDF)

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Education, Legislation, State Government

Good government, not Armageddon

February 28, 2012 By 17 Comments

By Nick Dranias

Somebody hit the panic button too quickly at the Arizona Republic. A couple of weeks ago, its editorial board declared plans for a Regulatory Tax Credit would result in “regulatory Armageddon.”

No doubt the tax credit has the potential to encourage serious regulatory reform. It would allow victims of excessive regulation to bill the government for its regulatory overreach. But, far from Armageddon, the initial impact of the pilot program proposed by the Arizona House Leadership is downright tiny.

Beginning in 2015, the reform would give taxpayers only a modest tax credit — $1,000 per tax year for individuals and $3,000 per tax year for corporations. The total for all credits would be capped at $800,000 per year—an infinitesimal 0.02% of the $3.4 billion in annual state income tax revenues.

Given the tax credit’s tiny fiscal footprint, the real question is: Why would anyone be against it?

It can’t be the cost of administration. Estimated administrative costs would be roughly $350,000 per year. That’s $50,000 less than what Phoenix recently paid for a single study of excessive government employee compensation.

It can’t be tax evasion. The handful of taxpayers who would claim a regulatory tax credit would paint a target on their backs, risking tax audits if they make frivolous claims.

And it can’t be the definition of “excessive regulation.” To trigger a tax credit, the taxpayer must show that a regulation does not verifiably protect public health and safety or guard against fraud, dangerous occupations or harmful property uses and conditions. This is the very definition of a needless regulation.

Yes, the Regulatory Tax Credit would modestly require the government to foot the bill of excessive regulations for affected taxpayers. Hopefully someday the program will expand. But this would only motivate governments to consider more seriously how and whether to regulate people and businesses. It would not repeal a single regulation government was willing to pay for.

That’s good government – not “regulatory Armageddon.”

Nick Dranias holds the Clarence J. and Katherine P. Duncan Chair for Constitutional Government and is director of the Joseph and Dorothy Donnelly Moller Center for Constitutional Government at the Goldwater Institute.

Learn more:

Goldwater Institute: The Missing Reform: Regulatory Tax Credits

Arizona Legislature: Nick Dranias Testimony in support of HB2815 (at 3:52)

Arizona Republic: Measure Itself Is Excessive

Arizona Republic: Tax credit could guard against regulatory abuse

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Economic Development, Government Reform, Legislation, State Economy, State Government

PAChyderm Coalition Publishes 1st Weekly Legislator Evaluation for this Session

February 24, 2012 By 5 Comments

Here is the general information provided about the evaluation:

We have been working with Republican legislators to refine the bill weights. The have had private access to our proposed weights prior to our publication of them.

The number of bills being tracked is 173 plus 37 bills that have strike all amendments.

There are a lot of legislators with high scores including many representatives who have +100% ratings!

Although we are well into the session, there are still many floor votes as well as committee votes to come. The scores currently are still heavily influenced by bill sponsorships compared to floor and committee votes, but, as more votes are taken, they will have an increasing impact on the scores as the session continues.

We have tightened up the categorization we apply to the scores. Reagan Republican and RINO have stayed the same, the Bipartisan Republican score range has expanded, and the other categories have higher score values with narrower ranges.

Click here to see the complete evaluation.


Filed Under: Conservatives, Elected Officials, Legislation, State Budget, State Economy, State Government, States Rights, Taxation, Uncategorized, Voters Guide Tagged With: , ,
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »