A partisan effort to make it harder for fossil fuel-based energy companies to obtain bank financing and banking services prompted a warning letter to the U.S. banking industry on Nov. 22 from the top financial officers of several states, including Arizona.
“Denying banking services to traditional, reliable energy production industries simply to advance radical, socialist policies from the White House, is both immoral and goes against the very free market principles that our country was founded upon,” said Arizona Treasurer Kimberly Yee in announcing the letter. “In this case, they are picking the energy industry as the losers and that goes against the free marketplace in America.”
Yee joined the financial officers of Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming in signing the letter, cautioning the banking industry of potential consequences for allowing itself to be used as a political pawn against law-abiding companies in the coal, oil, and natural gas industries.
According to the letter, the Biden Administration is “pressuring U.S. banks and financial institutions to limit, encumber, or outright refuse financing for traditional energy production companies.” The White House is also supporting an end to American financial support for traditional energy production projects in developing countries around the world, “likely ceding future development and exploration to Chinese interests,” the letter states.
“We believe, as almost all Americans do, that the free market should remain free and not be manipulated to advance social agendas,” the letter states. “We are not asking for special treatment of the fossil fuel industries. To the contrary, we simply want financial institutions to assess fossil fuel businesses as other legal businesses – without prejudice or preference.”
The letter also says the states have a compelling government interest “to select financial institutions that are not engaged in tactics to harm the very people whose money they are handling.”
Each state will undertake its own actions to counter the “undue pressure” being placed on the banking industry, according to the letter. Yee has not outlined what steps her office might take if financial institutions which do business with the state engage in efforts to deny services to the energy industry.
Yet another business advocacy group is challenging President Joe Biden’s continued calls for employers to implement COVID-19 vaccination mandates in the face of constitutional challenges.
“This mandate is not a small ask of America’s employers. Businesses are just recovering from the pandemic. They are dealing with the highest inflation in over 30 years, and they are struggling to deal with a supply chain and labor shortage crisis,” Alfredo Ortiz of the Job Creators Network wrote to Biden. “Now is the worst time to deputize them as the health police.”
The Job Creators Network is a petitioner in one of the federal court challenges to OSHA’s vaccination mandate for employers with 100 or more employees. That case and others federal challenges to Biden’s mandates are being transferred by order of the U.S. Supreme Court to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit so all such cases can be heard in one court.
Such lawsuits should not be necessary, Ortiz argues, but even more concerning is the fact White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki publicly stated last week that “nothing has changed” with the mandate timelines in the face of recent court orders.
The result, according to Ortiz, is that the Biden Administration is putting small business job creators in an “untenable position” of following the White House directives or following the court rulings.
“Despite two recent federal court rulings staying the employer vaccine mandate, the White House continues to willfully ignore the judiciary and call on businesses to continue implementing the rule by January 4, 2022, as if these judicial decisions never occurred,” Ortiz wrote to Biden. “We expect the White House to respect and listen to the judiciary rather than barnstorming ahead and bullying businesses to comply with this rule whose legal fate is in serious jeopardy.”
Small business owners in every community across America are caught in the middle and paying the price, Ortiz wrote.
“This conflicting guidance is unfair to small businesses simply trying to get their businesses back to pre-pandemic levels,” he said. “By following the White House guidance, they are incurring expenses and time-consuming setup costs.”
The Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) could vote as early as next month on a proposal that would ensure the reliability of electric, gas, and water service across the state by protecting thousands of utility employees from termination for not receiving a COVID-19 vaccination.
Commissioner Justin Olson and Commissioner Jim O’Connor are advocating for the ACC to adopt a policy and associated rules to prohibit the agency’s regulated utilities -also known as public service corporations (PSCs)- from compelling employees to be vaccinated to keep their jobs. Each violation of the policy could come with a hefty fine under the proposal.
“The Biden administration has unconstitutionally sought forced vaccinations and has intimidated companies into complying with this inappropriate policy,” Olson said of the proposal presented to the other three commissioners last week. “Workers should not have to choose between losing their jobs or being forced to receive a vaccine against their will.”
But Olson told AZ Free News on Tuesday he has another concern with the mandates, one that involves potential negative impacts to Arizona’s regulated utilities due to losing valuable employees through COVID-19 related resignations or terminations.
“Our utilities rely on a highly experienced and trained workforce.” Olson said. “We cannot allow Biden’s unconstitutional vaccine mandate to drive away critical employees whose skills are necessary to maintain safe and reliable power and water.”
The letter Olson and O’Connor sent to their fellow commissioners points out that the agency has the authority in the Arizona Constitution to “make and enforce rules, regulations, and orders” related to the safety and health of employees of PSCs.
“This is especially true when the federal government is intimidating companies to develop, implement and enforce such mandatory vaccine policies,” the letter states.
There are currently two federal COVID-19 vaccination mandates which could impact Arizona’s utilities. One is an executive order issued by President Joe Biden requiring federal contractors and subcontractors to impose mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policies.
According to Olson and O’Connor, the broad language of the executive order implicates the very PSCs which the ACC regulates “that have legally enforceable agreements with the federal government, including military bases in Arizona.”
The other mandate was issued by OSHA. It requires all private employers with 100 or more employees to implement a vaccination policy that can require stringent, invasive testing. The OSHA mandate is currently on hold while under review by federal courts across the country.
One of those courts, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, said OSHA’s mandate “raises serious constitutional concerns” and grossly exceeds the agency’s statutory authority.
Olson and O’Connor have asked that their concerns be placed on the agenda for discussion and possible vote at the ACC’s Dec. 15 and 16 open meetings.
Maricopa County families with a baby admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) will benefit from training kits that the American Heart Association will donate to teach critical infant CPR and lifesaving choking skills.
Approximately 1 out of every 10 babies in Arizona are born prematurely and are admitted to one of the state’s 27 NICU for a variety of health concerns. Maricopa County alone sees over 4,800 premature births a year, with a mortality rate of 5.4 percent.
But $400,000 allocated to Arizona from the American Rescue Plan Act will fund thousands of Infant CPR Anytime Kits, each of which includes a baby-sized mannequin to help prepare families, babysitters, and other caregivers to react in the event of a respiratory or cardiac emergency. The self-directed training takes about 20 minutes, according to the American Heart Association (AHA).
“This is an important step in protecting Arizona’s babies and benefits both parents and their children,” AHA Executive Director Debra Wilson said of the donation of the kits, which are co-branded by the AHA and the American Academy of Pediatrics.
The Arizona Secretary of State’s Office announced last week that enough valid signatures were turned in to let voters decide next year whether they support substantially reduced income tax rates set to take effect in 2022 or want to maintain the current higher rates.
But whether voters can actually weigh in on such issues in the November 2022 General Election is something the Arizona Supreme Court will likely be asked to decide.
In June, Gov. Doug Ducey signed an overhaul of Arizona’s income tax system as part of the $12.8 billion budget packet approved by the Legislature. It changes the state’s current five-tier income tax rates -from 2.59 percent up to a 4.5 percent base- to a two-tier plan with lower rates in 2022.
The legislation which created the new tax structure could even trigger a single 2.5 percent tax rate as soon as 2023 if Arizona’s revenues meet certain levels.
The flat tax system also addresses the impacts of Prop 208, which voters narrowly passed last year. Known as the Invest in Education Act, Prop 208 imposed an additional 3.5 percent tax surcharge effective 2021 on any income above $250,000 for a single filers or $500,000 for joint filers. The surcharge is on top of the current 4.5 percent base rate.
The revenue from the surcharge is slated to be used for public K-12 schools, but it does so by kicking Arizona’s highest earners to an 8 percent income tax. This put businesses in the state at a competitive disadvantage with Texas and Nevada which have no income tax, while New Mexico has a top rate of 4.9 percent.
Because the 3.5 percent Prop 208 surcharge was put into law by voters, state lawmakers could not directly undo it. Instead, the new flat tax rate plan would top out at 4.5 percent by absorbing the 3.5 percent surcharge.
However, supporters of Invest in Ed, now known as Invest in Arizona, want to void the new tax rate law despite the fact all Arizonans would share in the projected $1 billion savings. The group is trying to kill the flat rate plan by utilizing a provision of the Arizona Constitution which gives citizens 90 days after the legislative sessions ends to attempt to refer new state laws for voter approval.
Last week Invest in Arizona successfully submitted enough valid petition signatures to get the matter on the ballot next November as Proposition 307. In response to the petition drive, Ducey’s spokesman has continued to champion the new income tax structure, which would ultimately be the lowest flat tax in the country if state revenue targets are met.
“It keeps Arizona competitive,” said C.J. Karamargin. “We are returning tax dollars to the citizens of Arizona.”
Whether new laws dealing with state revenues such as income taxes are eligible for voter referendum has never been ruled on by a state court.
A lawsuit by the Arizona Free Enterprise Club argues that the Arizona Constitution actually prohibits issues related to the support and maintenance of state government to be referred to the ballot. A decision by Judge Katherine Cooper of the Maricopa County Superior Court is expected any day.
Whichever side loses in Cooper’s court is expected to appeal, with the Arizona Supreme Court expected to hear the case eventually.
Another wrinkle in the tax saga is that the Arizona Supreme Court ruled earlier this year that Prop 208 can be challenged on the basis of the state’s constitutional spending limits for K-12 schools. The justices recently sent the matter back to the Maricopa County Superior Court for additional arguments although the case is expected to be back at the Arizona Supreme Court early next year.
