by Staff Reporter | Aug 23, 2024 | Economy, News
By Staff Reporter |
A radical Democrat state representative is attempting to return to her middle-of-the-road legislative district for a new term in office.
State Representative Lorena Austin is running for reelection in Arizona Legislative District 9, which covers the city of Mesa. According to the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, the district is likely one of the most competitive in the state, with a 2.6% vote spread in the Commission’s nine focus elections. Democrats are slightly favored in the district, having won in five of those nine focus elections.
Despite her district being more moderate in its political makeup, Austin has demonstrated a propensity to become one of the most extreme leftist members of the Arizona Legislature on almost every issue.
In a struggling state and national economy, where many families are struggling to get by in life, keep their jobs, and save for their children’s futures, Austin showed no mercy with her votes. This year, she was one of a handful of members to vote against HCR 2002, which stated that the legislature recognizes, encourages, and continues to support Arizona’s beef producing farmers, ranchers, and families. Last year (2023), she voted no on SB 1131, which would have prohibited a county, city, or town from levying a tax on rental property.
Austin is also opposed to individual property rights, as her votes have indicated. In 2023, she was one of 14 members to vote against final passage of a bill prohibiting protestors from targeting people in their own homes by protesting on their residential property (SB 1023).
This latest legislative session (2024), Austin voted no on SB 1129, which would have allowed a property owner or the owners’ agent to request from law enforcement the immediate removal of a person who is unlawfully occupying a residential dwelling. She also opposed SB 1073, which would have established a new form of the existing offense of obstructing a highway or other public thoroughfare and classified this new form of the offense as a class 6 felony (which was introduced in response to protestors blocking traffic).
Austin’s legislative record extends, too, into bouts of radical socialism. In 2023, she co-sponsored HB 2610, which would have created a state-owned bank. Additionally, she co-sponsored HB 2653, which would have established that “restaurants and other food service establishments in this state may only serve water and disposable straws to customers on request.” Earlier this year, Austin voted no on HB 2629, which would have established November 7 of each year as Victims of Communism Day and required the State Board of Education to create a list of recommended resources for mandatory instruction on the topic in certain public school courses.
The Democrat lawmaker has refused to support solutions to help her state end the border crisis affecting almost every community in Arizona – not to mention elsewhere in the nation. In 2023, Austin co-sponsored HB 2604, which would have permitted the Arizona Department of Transportation to issue a driver’s license or nonoperating ID to a person without legal status in the United States. And in this most recent legislative session, she voted no on HB 2621, which would have deemed that the trafficking of fentanyl across Arizona’s border is a public health crisis and directed the Arizona Department of Health Services to do everything within its power to address the crisis. She also opposed SCR 1042, which proclaimed the legislature’s support for the people and government of the state of Texas in its efforts to secure our nation’s southern border.
Austin has an awful record in office on crimes against children. In 2023, she voted against SB 1028, which would have prohibited a person or business from engaging in an adult cabaret performance on public property or in a location where the performance could be viewed by a minor. She also voted no on SB 1583, which would have mandated that a level one sex offender who commits specified sexual offenses is required to register on the internet sex offender website if the offender was sentenced for a dangerous crime against children.
This most recent legislative session (2024), Austin continued her spree of opposing legislation that would have protected more Arizona children from horrific crimes committed against them. She voted no on SB 1236, which would have specified that any offender who was convicted of or adjudicated guilty except insane for sexual crimes against children, whether completed or preparatory, and was 18 years of age or older at the time of the offense, must be included on the internet sex offender website. She also opposed HB 2835, which would have established knowingly observing a nude minor for the purpose of engaging in sexual conduct for a person’s sexual gratification as a form of criminal sexual exploitation of a minor. And Austin voted no on a ballot referral (SCR 1021), which would statutorily require an adult who is convicted of a class 2 felony for any child sex trafficking offense to be sentenced to natural life imprisonment.
As with many of her fellow Democrats running for the state legislature, Austin promotes endorsements from left-leaning organizations for her campaign for the Arizona House of Representatives, including Moms Demand Action, Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona, Save Our Schools Arizona, Progressive Turnout Project, HRC in Arizona, AEA Fund for Public Education, NARAL Pro-Choice Arizona, Stonewall Democrats of Arizona, Arizona Education Association, Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Emily’s List, and Human Rights Campaign PAC.
There is one endorsement for Austin that appears to be absent from her website, from the Jane Fonda Climate PAC. Austin’s support from this PAC may be one of the most concerning for voters researching her record and determining which direction they want to see for their district. This PAC asserts that “major solutions are stopped cold: the Green New Deal, Build Back Better, clean energy investments, ending billions in tax subsidies to the fossil fuel industry – all because of politicians backed by Big Oil.”
The Green New Deal pushed by the Jane Fonda Climate PAC is the same championed by New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who is one of the most progressive lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The district is currently represented by two Democrats in the state House of Representatives. Austin and her fellow Democrat incumbent, Seth Blattman, ran unopposed in the recent primary election. Austin received 10,353 votes, and Blattman obtained 8,741 votes. They will face off against Republicans Mary Ann Mendoza and Kylie Barber, who also ran unopposed in the primary election. Mendoza garnered 10,429 votes, and Barber received 10,136 votes.
November’s General Election will be the second time that Mendoza has been pitted against Austin and Blattman. In 2022, Austin and Blattman defeated Mendoza and her running mate, Kathy Pearce, to assume their offices for the 2023 Arizona legislative session.
Correction: A previous version of this article listed the incorrect vote totals for the candidates. The totals have now been updated with the latest results from the Arizona Secretary of State website.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Aug 22, 2024 | Education, News
By Staff Reporter |
81 school board races were recommended for cancellation this year by the Maricopa County School Superintendent due to a lack of candidates.
35 districts were impacted. Maricopa County has 58 districts in total, meaning 60 percent of the districts either had no candidates or only one candidate running for a seat.
All but a handful of the races had one individual in the race poised for appointment by default. 72 of those seats were recommended to have the sole candidate appointed to them, with the remaining 9 seats declared vacant due to having no candidates at all.
The following districts have races impacted by the lack of candidates:
- Aguila Elementary School District: three appointments, two vacancies
- Alhambra Elementary School District: three appointments
- Arlington Elementary School District: three appointments
- Avondale Elementary School District: one appointment
- Balsz Elementary School District: one vacancy
- Buckeye Elementary School District: two appointments, one vacancy
- Cave Creek Unified School District: one appointment
- East Valley Institute of Technology – 4: one vacancy
- East Valley Institute of Technology – 6: one appointment
- East Valley Institute of Technology – 8: one appointment
- Fountain Hills Unified School District: one appointment
- Gila Bend Unified School District: one appointment, one vacancy
- Litchfield Elementary School District: three appointments
- Littleton Elementary School District: three appointments
- Madison Elementary School District: three appointments
- Mobile Elementary School District: three appointments
- Morristown Elementary School District: one appointment, one vacancy
- Murphy Elementary School District: three appointments, one vacancy
- Nadaburg Elementary School District: three appointments
- Osborn Elementary School District: three appointments
- Paloma Elementary School District: three appointments
- Palo Verde Elementary School District: four appointments
- Pendergast Elementary School District: three appointments
- Phoenix Elementary School District: three appointments
- Riverside Elementary School District: one appointment
- Saddle Mountain Unified School District: three appointments
- Sentinel Elementary School District: three appointments
- Tempe Union High School District: three appointments
- Union Elementary School District: two appointments, one vacancy
- West MEC – 3: one appointment
- West MEC – 4: one appointment
- West MEC – 5: one appointment
- West MEC – 6: one appointment
- Wickenburg Unified School District: three appointments
- Wilson Elementary School District: one appointment
Of the recommended appointments, 12 were write-in candidates: three for Aguila Elementary School District, three for Paloma Elementary School District, two for Union Elementary School District, one for Alhambra Elementary School District, one for East Valley Institute of Technology – 6, one for Gila Bend Unified School District, and one for Morristown Elementary School District.
The filing deadline for write-in candidates occurred at the end of July, with the filing period opening at the start of June.
State law authorizes the county school superintendent to either appoint a qualified elector or call a special election to fill the vacant seat.
As part of the former option consisting of an appointment process, the office of county superintendent receives up to three names from the relevant district governing board as well as a full list of candidates who applied with the district. Individuals not on those lists who are interested in being appointed may also apply directly to the office of county superintendent to be considered for appointment.
The office of county superintendent will then filter out applicants through interviews.
Only those who are registered voters in the state and residents of the school district for at least one year immediately preceding the day of the election are considered eligible to serve on a school governing board.
The county superintendent’s recommendations were submitted to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors for final approval.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Aug 21, 2024 | News
By Staff Reporter |
A new ad from incumbent Congressman Juan Ciscomani against Democratic opponent Kirsten Engel features clips of her denying the ongoing border crisis and issuing support for police defunding.
The ad featured several flashbacks from Engel on her positions ranging from her time as a state lawmaker through her first run for Congress against Ciscomani in 2022.
The former state lawmaker and University of Arizona law professor denied that Arizona had an immigration crisis during that first run for Congress. Engel said that physical barriers like walls weren’t a solution for her, and that the greater focus should be on providing greater aid to those arriving at our border rather than detainment.
“We do not need help at our border. We do need to secure the border. We have issues of drug trafficking and human smuggling that need to be addressed, but certainly not walls,” said Engel. “What we need from Washington is having an orderly asylum process. That’s national law, that’s international law. We need comprehensive immigration reform. We have to help our Dreamers.”
As a remedy to the border, Engel has advocated for border policy approaches favoring those who arrive in the nation outside the legal avenues for entry: an end to Title 42, legal pathways to citizenship, and deprioritizing illegal migration outside legal ports of entry.
Engel maintains these positions as defining her vision for securing the southern border. She has also criticized Ciscomani for not supporting a proposed bill to provide $20 billion for the border out of $118 billion in expenditures. That bill was mainly designed to ensure an additional provision of aid to Ukraine, $60 billion, and the remainder of the $38 billion given in aid to other foreign countries.
While Engel has been outspoken in recent years about border policy, she has distanced herself from conversations on policing since the BLM fallout after George Floyd’s death in 2020 and the conviction of responding officer Derek Chauvin less than a year later.
Engel advocated for police defunding during the 2020 Black Lives Matter riots, arguing that there needed to be less police available for responding to emergency calls and more alternatives.
“What we need to do is shift where the money [for police] is going,” said Engel. “Not every 911 call requires a police officer to show up at your door.”
In that same interview, Engel affirmed when she was asked whether she supported a reduction in police budgets.
“Yeah, the way you’ve asked that question, I agree with it,” said Engel.
Instead, Engel proposed that social workers should take over for police officers.
It was also during the peak point of BLM upheaval in the summer of 2020 that Engel publicly backed a claim by Tucson Councilwoman Lane Santa Cruz that Tucson police officers were to blame for the death of a man in their custody in April of that year.
Santa Cruz’s public accusations of wrongdoing prompted the officers to resign out of fear for their families’ safety.
The man, Carlos Ingram-Lopez, died from cardiac arrest due to acute levels of cocaine in his system and an enlarged heart.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Aug 21, 2024 | News
By Staff Reporter |
An Arizona appellate court has kicked a sales tax proposal for the city of Scottsdale off the November ballot.
The Arizona Court of Appeals sided with a challenge by three city residents (represented by the Goldwater Institute) that the city’s ballot descriptions inaccurately characterized the sales tax as a decrease rather than a pitch for a new tax.
“The City’s description of the measure fails to properly disclose the proposition’s principal provision — that it creates a new tax,” said the court.
The city of Scottsdale characterized the sales tax proposal as a decrease of the current sales tax expiring next June from .20 percent to .15 percent over 30 years.
“Shall Scottsdale’s current 0.20% transaction privilege and use tax rate, expiring June 30, 2025, be replaced and reduced to 0.15% for 30 years to fund improvements, maintenance, and increased police and fire protection of citywide parks, recreational facilities, and the preserve as determined by city ordinance?”
The Arizona Superior Court had previously disagreed the ballot proposal language was false or misleading, and had granted the city’s motion to dismiss the residents’ complaint. However, in their Monday ruling, the Arizona Court of Appeals took issue with the city’s promise that the new sales tax was a replacement and reduction to the current one.
“This new tax would neither reduce the current tax rate (because the tax will remain at .2 percent until it expires), nor reduce the current tax rate after its expiration (because it would create a new tax),” stated the court. “The proposition’s description that a ‘YES’ vote would reduce the “transaction privilege and use tax rate” — which in total is 1.75% and made up of multiple different taxes including the 0.20% at issue here — to 0.15% is misleading because a ‘YES’ vote, in fact, would implement a brand-new tax.”
The court went on to say that the city’s explanation of the implication of a “no” vote was misleading because it could prompt voters to believe that their voting had an effect on the inevitable end of the current tax.
“[T]he ‘NO’ language in both the full text and Tagline text fails to communicate the essential change that a ‘NO’ vote would effectuate,” said the court. “Namely, that the current tax would terminate as scheduled and no longer exist. A ‘NO’ vote does not, somehow, result in a reduction as the language states; a ‘NO’ vote results in the current tax terminating on June 30, 2025, as currently scheduled.”
In its order, the Arizona Court of Appeals reversed the superior court order and enjoined the city and Maricopa County from including the measure on the November ballot.
Although the court offered some explanation for its ruling, the appeals court promised a full opinion would come out as well.
The Goldwater Institute said in a press release announcing the court win that the ruling would ensure more honest representation for taxpayers in the future.
“Local leaders in Scottsdale and across Arizona should consider themselves warned: public officials should not be in the business of deceiving taxpayers so they’ll vote to raise taxes on themselves,” said the think tank.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Aug 20, 2024 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) is proposing to put a strict limit on childcare enrollment, but a policy group says that’s illegal.
The Goldwater Institute advised ADHS in a letter that such a cap on childcare facilities (preschools, daycares, and day camps, for example) would violate statutory requirements on agency rulemaking.
Arizona law restricts agencies from making any rules that exceed authorized subject matter areas, that supplement a more specific grant of rulemaking authority, and that aren’t specifically authorized by statute.
The Goldwater Institute argued that the proposal to impose a maximum group size on childcare facilities constitutes an authority that ADHS doesn’t possess within their regulatory powers.
“[A]n across-the-board cap on ‘group size,’ independent of any relevant considerations such as child-adult ratio, is not a regulation of ‘staffing per number and age groups of children’ [per their regulatory authority] and it is not justified by any other provision in the statute,” said the Goldwater Institute.
The organization also predicted in its letter that such a proposal would result in a greater burden on childcare facilities and a greater cost for families, in addition to reducing overall childcare availability.
The proposal concerns amendments to two rules pertaining to staff-to-children ratios: 9-5-404 and 9-5-726. The amendment adds on limitations of group size per age group.
Group size limitations begin small with younger children and expand as the ages rise: infants are limited to 10 in a group; one-year-old children are limited to 12 in a group; two-year-old children are limited to 16 in a group; three-year-old children are limited to 26 in a group; four-year-old children are limited to 30 in a group; and both five-year-old children and school-age children are limited to 40 in a group.
The amendments also struck provisions allowing volunteers to be counted as staff in staff-to-children ratios and restricting student aides or qualified teacher caregiver aides from being counted as staff. Also replaced were any instances of staff as “caregivers,” instead renaming them as “child educators.”
In a press release, Goldwater Institute staff attorney John Thorpe said the group size restrictions would not only be an exercise of authority beyond ADHS’ scope, it would serve to restrict families’ critical access to childcare facilities. Thorpe marked the proposal as another example of “ill-informed, heavy-handed bureaucratic regulation” within the state and nationwide.
“Imposing an arbitrary cap on the number of children allowed in a space — regardless of the size of the space, nature of the activity, or number of adults supervising — makes no sense,” stated Thorpe. “It’s especially pernicious during a childcare shortage, as it will force good preschools and childcare facilities to turn away families they’re perfectly equipped to serve for no other reason than an irrational bureaucratic requirement.”
Last December, a report by the Council for Strong America estimated that Arizona lost close to $5 billion annually in earnings, productivity, and revenue due to lack of adequate childcare. Over half of responding parents said they were late for work, leaving work early, missing days of work, or low in their productivity at work due to their childcare struggles.
Nearly 20 percent reported having been let go or fired from their work related to those struggles.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
