Two Arizona lawmakers are seeking to terminate a state commission at the end of this year.
State Representative Quang Nguyen, a Republican, recently posted a statement in support of one of the proposals this year at the Arizona Legislature, writing, “Government should work for the people – not against them. HB 2702 will cut red tape, eliminate waste, and prevent fraud & abuse. Taxpayers deserve accountability, efficiency, and results. Let’s make government work smarter.”
Government should work for the people—not against them. HB2702 will cut red tape, eliminate waste, and prevent fraud & abuse. Taxpayers deserve accountability, efficiency, and results. Let’s make government work smarter. #HB2702#GoodGovernance” pic.twitter.com/HHw3cvqy3w
This bill seeks to terminate the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission on December 31, 2025. This commission was created by the state legislature in 1982 and charged to “monitor the progress and implementation of new and continuing criminal justice legislation, facilitat[e] research among criminal justice agencies and help the legislature make data driven criminal justice policy.”
However, the bill states that “the current operations and practices of the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission have not aligned with and are contradictory to the legislative purposes underlying the legislature’s creation of the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, jeopardizing the constitutional rights and civil liberties that every Arizonan deserves under the United States Constitution and Constitution of Arizona.”
Those operations and practices include, according to the legislation, “lobb[ying], using taxpayer money, for surveillance and data collection practices on citizens that have not committed any crimes… and lobb[ying] for the creation of a database targeting lawful concealed carry weapon permit holders.”
HB 2702 opines that “It is troubling that taxpayer dollars are being used for intrusive and ultra vires lobbying efforts. State resources cannot be diverted to lobbying activities that contradict both the legislature’s mission and the criminal justice system in Arizona. The misuse of state monies for lobbying activities burdens taxpayers and creates the potential for the expansion of government power that could further jeopardize individual liberties and freedoms. Such unchecked governmental oversight expands the power of the state and is a threat to freedom.”
The bill was sponsored by Representative Alexander Kolodin, also a Republican.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
On Monday night, hundreds of protesters organized by the Party for Socialism and Liberation took to the streets of Phoenix. They marched against the mass deportation policy of the Trump administration in front of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) office on Central Avenue and the Capitol Museum.
The demonstrators blocked traffic and paraded with obscene signs and Mexican flags. The protests, which included several distinct marches throughout the city, were part of a “Day Without Immigrants,” opposed to the enforcement of U.S. immigration law. AZ Central reported that several incidents of reckless driving near a protest at 43rd Avenue and McDowell Road were observed with at least one person detained by Arizona State Troopers after fireworks were set off in the street. The radical leftist group posted to Instagram on Sunday, “Join us tomorrow to stand against the attacks on our communities. We refuse to let ICE tear apart our families and terrorize our people. Arizona says NO to raids, NO to deportations, NO to family separation!”
AZCentral noted that, among the signs visible, some read: “Families belong together” and “Donald Trump is a racist to all nations,” as well as “No more ICE,” “Don’t bite the hands that feed you,” “We speak for those that can’t” and “Mexicans Aren’t Going Anywhere.”
AZ: decenas de personas se manifiestan justo frente a las instalaciones de ICE en el centro de Phoenix. pic.twitter.com/1f7bQWbrcB
Metro Light Rail service was impacted by the protestors taking over the intersection as they approached Monterey Park, as reported by Arizona Family. ABC15 reported that the intersection was later closed by Phoenix Police responding to “reckless and unsafe” activity there.
Arizona Senator Wendy Rogers posted video of the march in front of the Capitol Museum, referring the gathering to ICE writing, “Hey @ICEgov! Right now. One-stop shop our in front of the @azcapitolmuseum”
Independent journalist ‘The Stu Studio’ posted a video of protestors to X chanting “Chinga La Migra!” which roughly translates to “F**k the Border Patrol,” in front of the ICE field office in Phoenix.
BREAKING: In Arizona, radical protesters have gathered outside the ICE Phoenix Field Office and are chanting the Spanish equivalent of "Fuck the Border Patrol." (Chinga La Migra)
A Phoenix Police Spokesman Sgt. Robert Scherer told AZCentral that Phoenix PD was notified of the protest in advance and had officers monitoring the situation. “The Phoenix Police Department respects the rights of all community members to peacefully express their first amendment rights,” he said in a statement.
“To ensure the safety of our community, resources were organized, and we began to monitor activity related to this event,” said Scherer. “This included working with our partners with the Arizona Department of Public Safety.”
Donald Trump’s renewed pledge to “Make America Great Again” requires nothing less than reigniting economic growth and prosperity. Wealth creation is essential. Yet as Congress prepares to extend and expand upon Trump’s landmark Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, he can take matters into his own hands by issuing an executive order to index capital gains for inflation.
Taxing inflationary “phantom” capital gains is an unfair and ill-advised policy that punishes risk and success.
Consider this: You invest $1,000, and after four years of Joe Biden in the White House, you sell that investment for $1,100. But since inflation raged during Biden’s tenure, the $1,100 you receive will be worth less in real terms than the $1,000 you invested. And yet, under current law, you will pay a tax on your $100 capital “gain.”
Talk about perverse!
“As has been well documented,” writes Alan Auerbach, University of California economist, “realized capital gains may be subject to tax rates that easily exceed 100% of real gains in the presence of inflation.”
But it’s the law. And not only would eliminating it be the fair thing to do for investors, it would ignite a surge of American prosperity.
Eight years ago, the late Treasury economist Gary Robbins estimated that indexing capital gains for inflation would, by 2025, create an additional 400,000 jobs, grow the U.S. capital stock by $1.1 trillion and boost GDP by roughly $500 billion. Because capital gains were never indexed, average household income today is $3,600 lower than it could have been otherwise.
However, it’s never too late to start doing the right thing.
Congress has repeatedly toyed with indexing capital gains. In fact, indexing capital gains used to be a bipartisan issue. In the early 1990s, congressional Democrats touted indexing as an effective way to boost economic growth and benefit workers.
“If we really want to increase growth,” said a youthful Chuck Schumer, the then-future Senate minority leader, “there are proposals that we can do. I would be for indexing all capital gains, savings and borrowings.”
Having mastered the ways of the D.C. swamp, Schumer now opposes indexing capital gains. Listen to Congressman Schumer, not Senator Swamp.
Indeed, as Trump emphasized in 2019, “Indexing is something that a lot of people have liked for a long time. It’s something that would be very easy to do. It’s something that I am certainly thinking about.”
Looking forward, the Congressional Budget Office estimated last month that federal capital gains tax receipts will total $2.8 trillion over the decade ahead. If only one-fourth of those tax receipts—a conservative estimate—are due to taxing phantom gains, American taxpayers will pay $700 billion in taxes on income that doesn’t exist.
Opponents of capital gains indexation say the subsequent revenue loss would be too great. But inasmuch as inflationary gains should not have been taxed in the first place, a revenue loss is a good thing. It represents the correction of a tax injustice.
The second-order effects that Robbins documents should remove any reservations based on revenue loss. Without the federal tax on inflationary gains, asset prices will adjust until they reach a new, higher equilibrium. Investors will see their portfolios appreciate bigly.
It’s a safe bet that millions of American investors and pensioners would choose a Dow Jones average of 50,000 with indexation over a Dow Jones average of 44,500 without indexation.
As taxpayers realize real capital gains, the federal government will collect billions of dollars in new tax revenue. Federal tax revenue may ultimately be higher with indexation, not lower.
There is the question of whether Trump has the legal authority to issue an executive order instructing the Treasury secretary to issue new regulations indexing the capital gains cost basis for inflation. It comes down to whether the governing Internal Revenue Code section covering the definition of the word “cost” is sufficiently ambiguous to allow regulatory reinterpretation. Congress never specifically mandated that “cost” was to be determined in nominal terms, nor did it prohibit the use of real valuation.
According to a watershed 2012 paper by Charles Cooper and Vincent Colatriano in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, “jurisprudential developments over the last two decades have confirmed . . . that Treasury has regulatory authority to index capital gains for inflation.” With that justification, Trump has little reason to hold back.
James Carter is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation and a principal with Navigators Global. He previously headed President Donald Trump’s tax team during the 2016-17 transition and served as a deputy assistant secretary of the Treasury for then-President George W. Bush.
Election volunteers will be allowed to observe signature verification processes in Maricopa County up close for the first time.
Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap announced the “common-sense” policy change on Monday. The recorder said the observers won’t have access to the party affiliation of voters.
“This change allows bipartisan election observers into the Signature Verification room to more directly observe the Signature Verification process,” said Heap. “This is one of the first of many commonsense improvements to make Maricopa’s election processes more trustworthy and transparent.”
This change allows bi-partisan election observers into the Signature Verification room to more directly observe the Signature Verification process. The new policy ensures Signature Verifiers are not able to see the Party Affiliation of the voters whose signatures are going… https://t.co/boxwqisUjG
— Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap (@azjustinheap) February 4, 2025
In order to protect the party affiliation of voters, Maricopa County won’t display political parties or any “personally identifying data” on the signature verification screen. This change will take effect with the May 2025 elections, per the recorder’s office.
Heap revealed in Monday’s press release containing the policy change announcement that previous recorder administrations hadn’t been fully honest about election workers’ abilities to access voters’ party affiliations and personal identifying information. Per Heap, all election workers had to do to access that information was scroll down on their screens during signature verification processes.
“Previously, voters were assured by election officials that no party or personally identifying data was available to signature verifiers,” said Heap. “In my review of our election processes I have discovered this was not the case. Signature verification workers who scrolled down the page would still see this information on the scans of older ballots.”
Prior to Heap’s administration, election volunteers weren’t permitted to observe signature verification processes. In the accompanying press release issued on Monday, the recorder’s office claimed that the previous policies requiring signature verification observation to take place from an adjacent hallway some distance from the work “made meaningful observation of the process impossible.”
“Removing that data will accomplish two important things: it brings bi-partisan observers back into the room to scrutinize the process and ensures that verifiers do not know the party affiliation of the voters whose signatures they are verifying. This will be the first of many commonsense improvements we will be making to ensure that future elections in Maricopa County are run in a trustworthy, transparent, and efficient manner,” concluded Heap.
Ahead of the presidential election last year, the state established the first legally binding signature verification rules as part of necessary modifications to election dates made to comply with the shortened electoral count deadline.
Those signature verification rules (contained within HB 2785) require the rejection of early ballot envelopes bearing signatures that don’t match the voter’s registration or records. Beginning next year, voters may bypass the signature verification requirement by showing their ID while returning their early ballot in person. Other Republican-led aspects ensuring stricter signature verification were stripped from the bill following negotiations with Democratic lawmakers and Governor Katie Hobbs.
Improving signature verification processes was a top priority for Heap during his campaign to oust then-incumbent Stephen Richer. Heap attested during his campaign that the county’s standards for signature verification were too lax based on his personal experiment with the process.
We recent has bond elections all over the state. Bond elections are "Mail-in only" and the ONLY security measure we have on mail-in ballots in signature verification. So I decided to test the system. I signed my ballot with an old signature that I haven't used sign high school…
— Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap (@azjustinheap) February 7, 2024
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
A bill to keep unwelcome tax increases away from unsuspecting Arizona taxpayers cleared its first body of the state legislature.
On Monday, the Arizona Senate passed SB 1013 with a 17-12 vote. One Democrat member of the chamber, Senator Burch, did not vote. All Senate Republicans voted to approve the legislation, while all Democrats in attendance voted in opposition.
🚨FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Legislation to Protect Arizonans from Unpopular Tax Hikes Passes the Senate
If passed by the Arizona Legislature and signed into law, the bill would “prohibit the common council of a municipality or the board of supervisors of a county from increasing an assessment, tax or fee without a two-thirds vote of the governing body.”
In a statement accompanying the news of the Senate vote, President Warren Petersen, the sponsor of the bill, said, “I’ve received a number of concerns and complaints from Arizonans who are frustrated with recent hikes on taxes and fees, especially in this era of inflation. We want government to be more efficient with taxpayer dollars, and this is a step in the right direction. This commonsense taxpayer protection requires the same threshold from local governments as the Legislature when raising or imposing fees. We want to make sure government fully funds its obligations, but we also want to protect our citizens from unnecessary taxation.”
Last month, the proposal cleared the Senate Government Committee with a 4-3 vote. All Republicans voted in favor of the bill, while all Democrats registered votes in opposition in committee.
On the Arizona Legislature’s Request to Speak system, representatives from the Republican Liberty Caucus of Arizona, Barry Goldwater Institute for Public Policy Research, Arizona Free Enterprise Club, Arizona Chamber of Commerce, National Federation of Independent Business, Republican Liberty Caucus of Arizona, and Home Builders Association of Central Arizona, signed in to support the bill. Representatives from the Arizona Municipal Water Users Association, City of Casa Grande, Sierra Club – Grand Canyon Chapter, City of Bisbee, Coconino County, the Arizona Center for Economic Progress, League of Arizona Cities and Towns, City of Tucson, signed in to oppose the legislation.
SB 1013 now makes its way to the Arizona House of Representatives for consideration. If passed by the state House, it would then make its way to the Governor’s Office for its fate. Governor Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, would likely veto the bill.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
