Last week’s announcement that Arizona Corporation Commissioner Justin Olson is joining the already crowded list of Republicans seeking the party’s nomination to take on U.S. Senator Mark Kelly in November 2022 is drawing attention to the basic economic reality of supply and demand.
Olson’s jump into the race occurred as several of his opponents filed their Third Quarter 2021 campaign committee report of receipts and expenditures.
One of those is Jim Lamon, a utility company executive and political newcomer who reported nearly $133,000 in contributions in Q3. That brought his total campaign receipts to $356,363 as of Sept. 30, nearly 90 percent of Lamon’s contributions have come from WinRed, a Virginia-based political action committee which distributes earmarked contributions to candidates and committees.
His Q3 report also lists $5 million in loans to the campaign which Lamon has guaranteed. As of Sept. 30, the campaign has spent more than $1.7 million. The ability to self-finance his campaign means Lamon, has more time to spent at in-person events in an effort increase his name recognition.
Mick McGuire, Arizona’s recently retired Arizona National Guard adjutant general, submitted his Q3 report showing $200,404 in new contributions, for a campaign total of about $427,000. Of that, more than $155,000 came from WinRed.
McGuire has also made or guaranteed almost $2.5 million in loans to his campaign since it started, of which $49,500 was dated in Q3. The campaign spent about $335,000 during Q3, nearly 93 percent of all disbursements to date.
Another candidate, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, listed just under $559,000 in new contributions in his Q3 report, upping his campaign total to almost $1 million as of Sept. 30. Of that, more than $620,000 has come from WinRed. Brnovich also reported disbursements through Sept. 30 of $486,760.
Another 13 Republicans have announced plans to vie for the nomination to challenge Kelly but none are seen as viable candidates. Although there have been few public endorsements yet for the Republican candidates for U.S. Senate, the Q3 reports offered a few clues as to current support.
According to Brnovich’s Q3 filing, he has received contributions from Mike Bailey, the former U.S. Attorney for the District of Arizona, as well as the Otoe Missoura Tribe of Oklahoma, while Lamon reported contributions from Senate Audit Liaison Ken Bennett and Look Ahead America’s Executive Director Matt Braynard.
McGuire’s report shows financial support from Kathleen Winn of the Maricopa County Community College District and venture capitalist Todd Belfer. However, Masters has the most impressive supporter thanks to his boss, billionaire and PayPayl founder Peter Thiel.
It is Thiel who contributed $10 million to a political action committee called Saving Arizona to support candidates like Masters.
On Sept. 14, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich sued President Joe Biden in federal court, firing one of the first salvos against a plan to create a national rule forcing private companies with 100 or more employees to mandate COVID-19 vaccinations for their employees or face substantial fines for non-compliance.
Several other state attorneys general are also pushing back, not only threatening legal action but also clarifying to private business owners and their employees that there is no national vaccination mandate at this time.
Biden’s plan announced Sept. 9 would create an emergency rule issued by the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). As of today, the closet the mandate has come to reality is an Oct. 12 draft of the emergency rule currently under review by the Office of Management and Budget.
Brnovich’s lawsuit contends a mandate against private businesses is one of the greatest infringements upon individual liberties and separation of powers ever attempted by a President. It also contends that at the same time millions of Arizonans would be forced to get vaccinated to keep their jobs, the White House is allowing throngs of undocumented immigrants into the state without any vaccination requirement.
Also named as defendants are U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas; U.S. Customs and Border Protection Acting Commissioner Troy Miller; and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Acting Commissioner Tae Johnson. There has been no response filed yet in the lawsuit which will be heard in the U.S. District Court in Phoenix.
Another of the attorneys general speaking out about Biden’s plan is Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who said the private employer mandate is “not the way the Constitution works” and that the White House doesn’t have the authority to impose such a rule.
Oklahoma Attorney General John O’Connor is another who is willing to follow Brnovich’s lead with litigation.
“In the event federal emergency rules are issued that place such an unlawful demand upon employers, our office will be joined by other state Attorneys General across the country to quickly sue and seek an injunction against any implementation or enforcement,” O’Connor stated, adding that any Oklahoma employer who mandates a COVID-19 vaccination does so at their own risk.
There is also Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, who wrote a letter to “All Montanans” on Oct. 14 with clarification on Biden’s plan.
“There has been a great deal of confusion following President Biden’s speech regarding vaccines and whether his speech trumps Montana law,” Knudsen wrote, adding that “no such rule or regulation is currently in effect.”
Knudson pointed out it is illegal under Montana state law to discriminate based on vaccination status. He also provided information on who citizens can report violations.
But before the Biden Administration can move closer to imposing a mandate the language of the OSHA rule must be published in the Federal Register for public comment. In the meantime, various legal challenges have been brought against the President over his order that federal workers and military members be vaccinated or risk losing their job.
Among the dozens of new laws which took effect in Arizona on Sept. 29 is one that provides for Peer-to-Peer Car Sharing businesses while addressing public safety and bringing in new tax revenues.
Peer-to-Peer (P2P) car sharing is the authorized, contracted use of a shared vehicle -for a fee- by an individual other than the shared vehicle’s owner. It does not apply to car rental agents nor to vehicle rentals with the services of a driver, but is optional for traditional short-term car rentals companies as well as individuals.
The new P2P law ensures that tax revenues are collected from those companies like Getaround which operate the platforms used by individual vehicle owners to connect with and rent their vehicles to other drivers. The law, created earlier this year by Senate Bill 1720, now requires such P2P platforms to collect and remit transaction privilege tax (TPT) on a monthly basis for all rentals it arranges.
But it is not only the platforms that have responsibilities under the new law.
An individual vehicle owner not otherwise in the business of renting vehicles does not have to have a TPT license in order to place a shared vehicle on a P2P platform, but the owner must certify to the Arizona Department of Revenue that TPT or Arizona’s use tax was paid when the vehicle was purchased or that out-of-state sales or use tax was paid if the vehicle was purchased out-of-state and later brought into Arizona.
A vehicle purchased in a private, casual sale where no TPT or use tax was paid cannot be certified by the Department of Revenue as an individually-owned shared vehicle. That won’t prevent such vehicles from being rented on a P2P platform, but the rentals are subject to certain surcharges, as are rentals of vehicles that an owner chooses to not certify with ADOR.
Pima and Maricopa counties, as well as the City of Phoenix, imposes additional taxes on short term vehicle rentals, including rentals arranged through a P2P platform.
Senate President Karen Fann attributed passage of SB1720 at the time to the efforts of Sen. David Livingston (R-LD22) and Rep. Travis Grantham (R-LD12) who garnered bipartisan support for the legislation. Among those backing the bill were key stakeholders in the tourism industry, including a major rental car business operating in Arizona.
“The result is a fair set of rules that respects the interests of car rental customers, car rental providers, vehicle purchasers, and the communities in which we operate,” said Kevin Cooper, GM of Enterprise Leasing Company of Phoenix.
Tuesday’s announcement by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security that non-essential travelers will be allowed to enter the United States via land and ferry Ports of Entry (POEs) starting sometime next month if they present “appropriate documentation” of being fully vaccinated for COVID-19 is welcome news for businesses and communities across Arizona.
“Cross-border travel creates significant economic activity in our border communities and benefits our broader economy,” U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said in a statement, which did not include an effective date other than sometime in early November.
In 2019, Mexicans were estimated to have spent about $1.4 billion in Arizona. While Mayorkas called the travel of tourists and others who come to Arizona for various reasons “nonessential,” many business owners around the seven CBP Ports of Entry in Arizona say the revenues associated with regulated crossing is anything but.
“Taking this step to welcome vaccinated tourists will be an essential push to strengthen all border communities that heavily rely on international commerce,” according to the Nogales-Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce, which noted the county’s economy has been “heavily impacted” by the travel restrictions.
Those COVID-19 travel restrictions at POEs were initially put into effect in March 2020 as a public health measure. Essential travel -medical, educations, employment- was later allowed but President Joe Biden has continually extended the non-essential travel ban, despite data showing the ongoing closure was decimating the economies of Arizona border communities.
Critics also pointed to the fact that air travel between the two counties has been allowed for months. Mayorkas’ announcement, which also applies to POE access into the United States from Canada, came just days before an Oct. 21 deadline on non-essential travel was set to expire.
The irony of the White House announcement, however, has not been lost on one Arizona business owner.
Constanin Querard of Grassroots Direct, LLC noted that the policy change means “fully vaccinated people who want to come in legally can now get in as easily as unvaccinated people who want to come in illegally.”
Meanwhile, the Biden Administration’s refusal to fully reopen the Ports of Entry to land travel before now is having an unexpected beneficial impact for one group.
The Douglas POE in Cochise County is an economic driver in a community controlled and governed by Democrats for decades. But according to Robert Montgomery, the devastating economic impact of the non-essential travel restrictions has been a boon for the Cochise County Republican Committee.
Montgomery, chairman of the CCRC, told AZ Free News that many “very frustrated lifelong Democrats” have been checking out the Republican platform. And they like what they see, particularly on the issues of abortion, gun rights, and illegal immigration, Montgomery said.
This is resulting in more Conservatives getting involved in local public office, from school boards to the city council, and Montgomery says the list of Republican precinct committeemen is growing.
He added that the transition from blue to red voters in border communities “is not unique to Cochise County; it’s happening across southern Arizona and the southwest U.S. border,” he said.
Since March 2020 it has become easier for federal employees to apply for benefits under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA) if they contracted COVID-19 related to their jobs. Now, most federal employees will be able to pursue similar benefits for adverse reactions experienced due to mandatory vaccinations.
According to FECA Bulletin 2022-01, workers’ compensation benefits cover injuries that occur in the performance of duty and generally do not authorize provision of preventive measures such as vaccines and inoculations. But on Sept. 9, President Joe Biden issued an executive order making COVID-19 vaccination a requirement of most federal employment, both new and existing, by Nov. 22.
“As such, employees impacted by this mandate who receive required COVID-19 vaccinations on or after the date of the executive order may be afforded coverage under the FECA for any adverse reactions to the vaccine itself, and for any injuries sustained while obtaining the vaccination,” according to the FECA bulletin dated Oct. 1.
If a FECA claim is received for a COVID-19 vaccination prior to Sept. 9, coverage is afforded “only if the vaccine was administered or sponsored by the employing agency,” the bulletin states.
Biden’s executive order applies to any executive agency that fall under the executive branch of the government (excluding the Government Accountability Office), even if the employee is engaged in telework or works remotely.
Eligibility under FECA benefits will extend to injuries sustained as “the direct result of an employee receiving their mandated vaccination,” such as accidents while commuting to and from a vaccination site, as well as slip and fall injuries occurring at the vaccination site.
Biden’s COVID-19 vaccination mandate allows for limited accommodations for employees who cannot be vaccinated “because of a disability or because of a sincerely held religious belief, practice or observance.” There is currently no FECA coverage for booster vaccinations.
Postal Service employees are not included in the Sept. 9 executive order but are expected to be subject to a vaccination requirement under upcoming temporary orders from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration for companies with 100 or more employees. There has been no announcement as to when OSHA’s rules will be announced or go into effect.
COVID-19 vaccinations are not the only pandemic related claims which FECA deals with.
In March 2020, then-President Donald Trump announced that federal employees who contract COVID-19 through their jobs would be entitled to coverage under FECA. Special case handling considerations were put in place for those engaged in high-risk duties such as members of law enforcement, first responders, and front-line medical and public health personnel. But all other employees were required to provide a factual statement and any available evidence concerning exposure in an attempt to obtain benefits.
Then in October 2020, FECA announced new procedures for approving claims of those employees whose positions were not classified as high-risk but their individual employment circumstances “are the same or similar to the circumstances for high-risk determination by position.”
This was followed in March when Section 4016 of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 became law. It relaxed the FECA rules once again, making it easier for most federal employees diagnosed with COVID-19 to file a claim for an injury “proximately caused by employment” if their duties required contact with patients, members of the public, or co-workers, or included a risk of exposure to the virus prior to the diagnosis.
In May, the U.S. Department of Labor announced that any COVID-19 related FECA claims denied or withdrawn prior to March 12 would be eligible for review by the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP) under the new eligibility criteria. The advisory also encouraged anyone who believed they had contracted COVID-19 “as a result of” federal employment to file a FECA claim.
