On Thursday, the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) struck down New York’s concealed carry restriction requiring individuals to prove that they required “a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community.”
In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., et al. v. Bruen, Superintendent of New York State Police, et al., opinion author Justice Clarence Thomas declared that New York’s “proper-cause requirement” violated the Fourteenth Amendment by “preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self defense needs” from exercising their right to keep and bear arms.
The Supreme Court STRIKES DOWN a New York gun-control law that required people to show "proper cause" to get a license to carry a concealed handgun outside the home. The vote is 6-3. https://t.co/jA2Gl7lTiG
Arizona is one of the most gun-friendly states in the nation. However, nothing in this world is immune from change. This principle is most obvious with the makeup of the state legislature: the Republican majority has been shrinking over the past decade. A loss of the majority would likely result in an overhaul of current gun rights in the state.
At present, state law allows citizens 18 or older to openly carry a firearm without a permit, and individuals 21 or older may concealed carry a firearm without a license or permit (unless they’re active military or veterans aged 19 or older). The law also doesn’t require individuals to obtain a permit or registration for firearms, and it also doesn’t require a background check when purchasing a handgun from a private individual. Additionally, there aren’t any magazine size restrictions.
Though, it may not just be the loss of a majority that ushers in sweeping gun control measures. State legislators’ assessments of Thursday’s witching hour budget proceedings revealed that current Republican leadership may be willing to work with Democrats to reform gun laws.
State Representative Jacqueline Parker (R-Mesa) predicted that the budget’s bipartisan support was a harbinger of governing changes to come out of the legislature. Parker warned that current Republican legislators would back gun control measures, in what would be similar to their D.C. counterparts working currently with the White House to pass red flag legislation.
Time to retweet this one again. After what 90% of the state Republicans did today, DO NOT BE SURPRISED IF RED FLAG LAWS COME NEXT. One betrayal for money, power, & control will lead to more betrayals for money, power, & control. Apparently that’s politics… https://t.co/amvVmqvk5K
— Jacqueline Parker (@electjacqparker) June 23, 2022
This ruling is the latest in a series that conservatives chalked up as crucial victories for constitutional protections. Supporters of the gun rights ruling expressed fondness of Thomas’ explanation of how, historically, gun control laws were implemented to bar Black individuals from gun ownership.
Clarence Thomas turns the tables and calls gun control racist.
President Joe Biden condemned the ruling in a statement, claiming that the opinion of the court contradicted “both common sense and the Constitution.” Biden cited the recent mass shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas as reasons why increased gun control was necessary.
New York Governor Kathy Hochul insisted that SCOTUS should’ve determined its ruling by current affairs, not precedent or past constitutional arguments. Hochul pledged to act through their state legislature in the near future.
It is outrageous that at a moment of national reckoning on gun violence, the Supreme Court has recklessly struck down a New York law that limits those who can carry concealed weapons.
— Governor Kathy Hochul (@GovKathyHochul) June 23, 2022
Hochul also threatened to only allow muskets as a valid form of arms, despite the Constitution not specifying the type of arms that Americans may keep and bear.
KATHY HOCHUL: "I would like to point out to the Supreme Court justices, that the only weapons at that time were muskets. I'm prepared to go back to muskets." pic.twitter.com/xGoYKGE6g0
Shortly after his initial reaction to the SCOTUS ruling, Biden issued a follow-up statement addressing Congress’ progress on gun control legislation. If enacted, the federal government would enforce a swath of red flag laws. Critics of the increased gun control measure called it a “gun grab” and a direct affront to the Second Amendment.
Read USDOJ's statement on #Bruen and then ponder the fact that in the Senate gun bill the DOJ will fund the grants enabling the development and enforcement of "red flag" laws in state capitols. They are not interested in protecting your constitutional rights. pic.twitter.com/oKFOVZQt5x
With one week to go before the end of the fiscal year, the Arizona legislature managed to reconcile enough differences to pass a finalized version of the budget. However, Republican legislators opposed to the historic $18 billion budget have reported that the controlling party made the budget more palatable for members across the aisle rather than those of their own party.
Although Democratic legislators initially expressed great frustration about the budget, it appears that they may have feigned their opposition — the overwhelming majority of Democrats voted for the budget.
— Jacqueline Parker (@electjacqparker) June 23, 2022
State Representative Jacqueline Parker (R-Mesa) was one of the legislators that voted against the budget. In a Thursday interview with “Conservative Circus,” Parker talked openly about the backdoor proceedings that went on over the last week, claiming that GOP leadership and Governor Doug Ducey gave Democrats what they wanted at the cost of Arizonans’ best interests.
All throughout Thursday’s voting, Parker offered updates on floor proceedings. She noted the shared levity between the Republicans and Democrats as the total expenditures added up with each bill passed.
Democrat budget bill #10 (now Republicans & Democrats are making jokes on the floor about the record $16 Billion they’re spending): pic.twitter.com/wuRWl2bNs6
— Jacqueline Parker (@electjacqparker) June 23, 2022
Parker also noted that the budget received near-unanimous support from Democrats — unique, since Democrats normally have opposed past Republican-majority budgets.
Contrary to assurances from House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Regina Cobb (R-Kingman) that the budget would enable the state to “weather the storm” of a future recession, Parker said that the budget provisions would bankrupt the state in a recession.
“Spending is colossal, there are no massive tax cuts, and it’s exceeding our actual fiscal revenues. We’re looking at, probably, future bankruptcy as a recession comes forward,” said Parker.
Parker said that several others brought these concerns to Republican leadership prior to floor votes, but that they were ignored. The representative reported that the leaders were more interested in pleasing Democrats than with working out a conservative budget.
“Leadership essentially just said, ‘It’s easier to just go buy Democrats,’” recounted Parker. “They bought them to the tune of six billion more dollars.”
Democrat budget bill #12 -apparently it’s $18 billion now. So AZ enjoy your pending bankruptcy since that now exceeds our revenue, even with the most generous accounting. pic.twitter.com/6JtMXbdmnT
— Jacqueline Parker (@electjacqparker) June 23, 2022
Although school choice advocates touted the universal expansion of the state’s Empowerment Account Scholarship (ESA) Program, Parker reported that Governor Doug Ducey subverted those efforts. Parker said that she and other unnamed legislators received a 2 am call warning that the ESA expansion came with a “poison pill” from the Ninth Floor.
“Ducey has made an agreement with the Democrats that if they don’t refer the ESA bill to the ballot or challenge it in court within the 90 day period, they’re going to extend the aggregate expenditure limit forever, indefinitely,” said Parker.
Parker warned that this secret deal would lead to education expenditures that would break past the 50 percent limit and possibly take over the entire budget.
LITERALLY nothing that’s a priority for Arizonans was included in that budget. Priorities for lobbyists-yes. Priorities for democrats-yes-they were bouncing off the walls with glee. All other Arizonans can look forward to looming bankruptcy &financial hardship in the near future. https://t.co/I6Tjvx9WwM
— Jacqueline Parker (@electjacqparker) June 23, 2022
One of the contentious aspects of the budget was the expansion of homeless shelters throughout Arizona suburbs. State Representative Joseph Chaplik (R-Scottsdale), another one of the lone Republicans who opposed the budget alongside Parker, lamented that the budget policies would turn the state into another California.
It is 3:45am and the democrat budget is passing. Hb2862 will bring a homeless shelter and many more homeless to every suburb in Arizona making us like SF, SEA, PDX, and L.A. Of course I was a No vote!
Another was the tax credits to entice the film industry to come to the state. The last similar tax credit program bled the state of millions of dollars leading up to the 2008 recession.
Now you know who’s responsible for the bills you can’t pay & the inflation you can’t stop… but hey, AZ may get a shout out in the next woke Hollywood movie filmed in the desert… Remember that when walking across said desert because you can’t afford gas! 🤣😩 https://t.co/7b2AXGzOm3
— Jacqueline Parker (@electjacqparker) June 23, 2022
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
On Wednesday, the Arizona Senate Appropriations Committee passed budget legislation to offer tax credits to movie studios, after a previous effort on the matter failed. Legislators resurrected this effort by introducing it through a strike-everything amendment on HB2156 — its similar predecessor, SB1708, passed through the Senate but failed to make it to the House floor earlier this year. Analysis of the predecessor bill estimated that it would incur losses to the state averaging $150 million.
The legislation would establish a program to promote workforce development and expansion of the movie industry. Further, movie companies would receive credits up to 15 percent if they spend up to $10 million in production costs, 17.5 percent if they spend over $10 million up to $35 million, and 20 percent if they spend over $35 million.
According to the Nashville Film Institute (NFI), the average cost of making a feature film ranges between $100 and $150 million, though it noted that some comedy and animated feature films like those from DreamWorks average between $70 and $90 million.
AZ Free News reviewed the production costs for mainstream feature films in theaters currently; all are well over $35 million. The blockbuster hit “Top Gun: Maverick” had a production budget of $170 million (as of this report, the film has grossed over $900 million worldwide in under a month). Pixar’s latest animated film, “Lightyear,” cost about $200 million to produce. The biopic, “Elvis,” had a significantly lower cost at $85 million.
The legislation would also limit tax credits exceeding $150 million in any calendar year from being preapproved.
Nick Simonetta, a lobbyist, testified to the committee that leadership in both chambers wanted to move this bill at this time. Simonetta said that this version of the bill, HB2156, was an improvement on a predecessor tax credit bill passed by the committee in February, calling the updated bill the “Cadillac” of accountability.
“You cannot claim a credit in this state for the benefit of the program without paying taxes on the expenditures that you’re making,” said Simonetta.
Simonetta testified that HB2156 was ultimately an infrastructure bill that would create a nonexistent industry in Arizona. He referenced two different movie filming complexes being built in the Scottsdale and Buckeye areas.
“The folks investing in these facilities to build movie sound stage complexes and all the things that go with them — the buildings, the office space, the commissary, the mill space, the back lots, everything — this will be investments of hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars, even just for the first phases of these complexes,” said Simonetta.
State Senator Sonny Borrelli (R-Lake Havasu City) joked that he was only voting for the bill with the contingency that State Senator David Livingston (R-Peoria) didn’t get a movie role.
State Senator Kelly Townsend (R-Mesa) flipped her vote this time around, having voted against the legislation’s predecessor previously. Townsend didn’t offer an in-depth explanation on her change of heart. She joked that Simonetta’s “little extra explanation” past the cut-off time for his testimony was enough to change her mind.
In the name of the #AZLEG budget & fiscal conservatism, tonight’s dinner will be provided by Dollar Tree. #StartYourOwnRumor
— Senator Kelly Townsend 🇺🇸 (@AZKellyT) June 23, 2022
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club criticized the tax credit bill, arguing that it would cost Arizonans hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars to subsidize Hollywood liberals.
— Arizona Free Enterprise Club (@azfec) June 22, 2022
Arizona Republican Party Political Director Jeremiah Cota commented that the tax credits only sweetened the deal for Democrats, and played into “woke” agendas contrary to Arizonan interests.
If you support the refundable movie tax credits so you can "get a deal done" in Arizona's budget.
It's also fair to say you support the groomers at @Disney because you know it's woke companies like Disney who stand to gain the most from such a sweetheart deal.#AZLeg
— Jeremiah Cota #InflationStrong✊️ (@jeremiahcota) June 22, 2022
The state’s previous tax credit program for movie companies that began in 2005 bled the state of millions of dollars. At the time, Canada introduced tax incentives that pulled movie companies away from Arizona and all other states. Incentives like Arizona’s tax credit program were launched in response to Canada as a means of enticing movie companies to return to the states.
Arizona’s tax credit program lapsed officially in 2010, though it was shut down by the 2008 recession.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Once again, the existence of a decades-long strategy to suffocate political opposition through social justice-oriented investing criteria, or “social credit scores” determined by Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria, was affirmed on a global platform, just months after State Representative Joel John (R-Buckeye) denied its existence. John helped kill legislation preventing ESG discrimination, HB2656, because he said such a problem didn’t exist.
“I’ve asked the sponsor to give me real-world examples of why this bill is needed, and I didn’t get that. I even got a call from my cousin, who doesn’t live in my district, telling me that this bill is needed and to pass it right now and I said ‘why is it a problem man? Help me understand,’” said John. “For those of us who happen to be in this chamber, but don’t live, eat, and breathe politics 24/7, when I’m not in this chamber I’m out in a remote area working on some irrigation project, but my cousin said this is going to negatively affect farmers. This is going to affect our community, and I said, ‘Oh wow. Would you please do me a favor and talk to some of those guys as to why this is a problem. That would really help me. So, I never did hear back.”
John didn’t respond to AZ Free News’ request for comment.
Utah State Treasurer Marlo Oaks affirmed the reality of ESG discrimination in an interview with Fox News host Tucker Carlson last week. Oaks explained that ESG was a “problematic” outgrowth of something investors call “socially responsible investing,” or “SRI.”
“ESG engages with companies and engages with the market to drive a political outcome. That’s why it’s so problematic,” said Oaks.
Oaks claimed that ESG was one of the reasons why Americans are facing high gas prices. He explained that there was a supply issue because companies lacked capital. Oaks attributed the 90 percent drop in investments — from 59 funds totaling $46.6 billion in 2015 to 11 funds totaling $4.6 billion in 2021 — to ESG discrimination.
“People have decided that they do not want to participate in the fossil fuel industry, and so they are cutting off capital,” said Oaks.
The concept of ESG dates back to 2004, as Forbes reported in a 2008 investigative piece on the subject, when the former United Nations (UN) Secretary General Kofi Annan invited over 50 of the top financial institution CEOs at the time to an initiative to influence markets using ESG screens. Reports produced by this initiative coining the term ESG prompted the New York Stock Exchange to roll out its Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) in 2006 and the Sustainable Stock Exchange Initiative (SSEI) in 2007.
At present, companies that apply ESG scoring look to Stakeholder Capitalism Metrics developed by the World Economic Forum (WEF), a pro-globalism lobbying organization, to determine their measure of ESG enforcement.
Over 70 major international companies covering nearly all aspects of consumerism use the WEF metrics system, among them a number of financial services companies (emphasis added): Bank of America, Bayer, Boston Consulting Group, bp, Dell Technologies, Deloitte, Fidelity International, Heineken, Hyundai, IBM, Kia, Lord, Abbett & Co., Mastercard, Mitsubishi, Moderna, NASDAQ, Nestle, Paypal, Salesforce, Sony, and Unilever.
The world’s greatest asset manager, BlackRock, is listed as one of WEF’s 100 strategic partners. Also listed are Amazon, AstraZeneca, Chevron, Cisco, Citi, Coca-Cola, General Electric (GE), Goldman Sachs, Google, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Hitachi, Honeywell, HP, Intel, Johnson & Johnson, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Meta (Facebook), McKinsey & Company, Morgan Stanley, PepsiCo, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, S&P Global, Uber, UPS, Verizon, Volvo, Volkswagen, and Western Union. (Again, we added emphasis to those financial services companies of interest).
Although the WEF referred to their metrics system as one related to “capitalism,” their use of the term is contested. WEF Founder Klaus Schwab meant for his redefined version of “capitalism” to be understood through a term he coined, “stakeholder capitalism,” which posits that modern enterprises must serve those who benefit from corporate behavior, stakeholders, in addition to shareholders to achieve long-term growth and prosperity. Hence, social credit scores.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The Arizona House approved a universal expansion of the state’s school choice program on Wednesday afternoon. It now heads to the Senate for review.
The legislation, HB2853 by State Representative Ben Toma (R-Peoria), prompted protracted arguments that delayed the vote for about an hour. House Republicans managed to overcome Tuesday’s budget disputes to rally the majority to pass the bill, 31-26 along party lines. Anti-school choice activists in the gallery shouted “Shame!” repeatedly as the vote totals were read, adding to their general disruption and commentary presented throughout the hour-long debate on HB2853.
Democrats asserted that public schools weren’t fully funded, insinuating that was why they fell short in the eyes of Republicans and what they claimed was a minority of Arizona parents. They insisted that universal school choice through the state’s Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) Program contradicted the will of a majority of Arizona voters.
Republicans argued that school choice should be the option for all students, regardless of income or zip code. They repeated the idea that parents were the ultimate accountability for student success and outcomes, not government.
As the final vote and argument presented, Toma argued that Democrats’ logic meant that voters couldn’t ever possibly change their mind on the subject of school choice, which he insisted wasn’t true. Toma insisted that dollars should follow the students and not be the ownership of individual systems.
Toma wondered why private schools should be the exclusive domain of the wealthy, citing back to committee testimony from Drew Anderson — a South Phoenix pastor, Democrat, and beneficiary of school choice, which lifted him out of the squalor of public schools and onto a path resulting in his becoming an NFL player and consequently enabling him to lift his entire family out of poverty.
“This is giving everyone the opportunity to make full use of all their choices,” said Toma.
AZ Free News summarized the highlights of the partisan floor arguments for and against HB2853.
Democrat Arguments Against Universal School Choice:
State Representative Kelli Butler (D-Paradise Valley) characterized the bill repeatedly as “disrespecting the will of voters,” which earned reprimanding from Speaker Pro Tempore Travis Grantham (R-Gilbert). Butler doubted that beneficiaries of the ESA Program were using their funds to “learn anything,” claiming that there wasn’t proper oversight of beneficiary schools’ curriculum.
“They could be learning the most basic things and using our tax dollars,” said Butler.
State Representative Lorenzo Sierra (D-Avondale) said that public schools provided a far superior education, pointing out that 19 out of 20 Flinn Scholars went to public schools.
Sierra also predicted there would be regulations on this bill, speculating that a group of liberals would launch a school built around the 1619 Project, and that the legislature would then attempt to regulate private schools if that happened.
State Representative Judy Schwiebert (D-Phoenix) said that a vast majority of families choose a public district for their children because of their accountability and presence of school boards, calling public school curriculum “well-rounded, publicly vetted, [and] diverse.”
Ultimately, Schwiebert insisted that not all children deserved school choice.
“Technically I know we’re giving it to parents, but let’s be real about it, we’re funneling it to private schools,” said Schwiebert.
State Representative Mitzi Epstein (D-Chandler) said that school choice expansion at this scale would greatly increase cost of administration, and called parents’ access to taxpayer dollars to individualize their children’s education “inefficient.”
State Representative Andrés Cano (D-Tucson) asked his Republican colleagues to submit personal financial disclosures about their benefit to school choice.
State Representative Sarah Liguori complained that the ESA Program was corrupted because some of her wealthier “mom friends” used program funds toward their children’s education. Ligouri said that those individuals should pay for private schooling themselves.
House Minority Leader Reginald Bolding (D-Laveen) claimed that “millionaires and billionaires” would receive a check to subsidize their child’s private schooling. He claimed that private schools wouldn’t return ESA program money even if the family couldn’t cover the rest of the tuition, and that public schools would have to “pick up the slack.”
State Representative Melody Hernandez (D-Tempe) said that expanding the ESA Program would actually trap low-income families in failing schools, many of whom she said were minorities. She called the bill “immoral,” and claimed that Republicans were targeting people like her by expanding a system of oppression.
Republican Arguments For Universal School Choice:
State Representative Lupe Diaz (R-Hereford) insisted that Democrats’ arguments about the harm of school choice couldn’t be true based on the longevity and successes of school choice in Arizona’s history.
“If this program causes so much heartache and blows up public schools, then it wouldn’t have the longevity it has now,” asserted Diaz.
State Representative Shawnna Bolick (R-Phoenix) said she would’ve loved to have school choice options like this growing up, and asserted that it was a good thing that children could use ESA dollars for college education as well.
“Why should we wait until higher education to allow taxpayers to utilize these public dollars for their [children’s] education?” said Bolick.
State Representative John Fillmore (R-Apache Junction) reminded the floor that K-12 spending eats up almost half of general fund money, yet Democrats argued it wasn’t enough. Fillmore also read Arizona Department of Education (ADE) data revealing the low passage rates for children in standardized testing.
“The fact of the matter is, the schools have failed us. Parents are taking their kids out because they see this failure,” said Fillmore.
State Representative Joanne Osborne (R-Goodyear) said that every generation of her family dating back to the late 1890s graduated from Arizona’s public school systems, and that her daughter is a current public school teacher, but that those factors didn’t outweigh her care for children’s needs.
Osborne characterized HB2853 as a win for all Arizona schoolchildren, and asserted that a majority of Arizona parents want school choice. Her remark prompted commentary from the gallery.
Hopefully this time you can control yourselves and not yell in committee hearings and make a spectacle of yourselves. Such behavior is an embarrassment to my profession as a teacher. https://t.co/fQfhq0bFcv
— Paul "nothing but trouble" Boyer (@PaulDBoyer) June 22, 2022
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Less than 24 hours after the Joint Legislative Budget Committee published the proposed budget report late Monday, infighting broke out among Arizona’s House and Senate Republicans.
Tuesday marked lengthy budget discussions in the House Appropriations Committee, but in the Senate discussions were cut off abruptly with an indefinite recess of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Effectively, public budget talks ended before they started in half of the State Capitol.
State Senator David Gowan (R-Sierra Vista) said that the House didn’t honor its agreements to pass some bills; one of those significant ones being the Arizona Board of Regents (ABOR) continuation.
“The House has decided that they will not honor the deals we created together and move things forward. I know there’s some media out there, social stuff going on, that they’re trying to pin us and maybe leverage us. But the point is here, they blew the deal,” said Gowan.
Gowan added that he wasn’t willing to call the committee together later on in the day, either. It appears that House legislators reneged on some serious closed-door talks — enough to upset him.
“It would be pretty hard for me to want to come back and help people who wish not to honor deals. In that effort, it’s just not appropriate in what just occurred, so I want that out to the world,” said Gowan.
After moving 3 budget bills this morning, the Senate Appropriations Committee has recessed indefinitely due to House Leadership Members going back on a promise to push forward some important Senate budget bills, including the continuation of @AZRegents. @DavidGowanAZ explains⬇️ pic.twitter.com/93zaM20NfH
However, State Representative Travis Grantham (R-Gilbert) contended that he’d never heard of these deals as the House Rules Committee Chairman. He criticized Gowan’s preferences as “special interest” legislation that was “fat, bloated, […] unconstitutional,” and adverse to Republican interests. Gowan didn’t reply.
“I have never discussed a deal, agreed to a deal or been part of some secretive deal to move certain Senator’s special interest bills that are fat, bloated and in some instances likely unconstitutional,” wrote Grantham. “And further, why would we invite and pay an industry, with taxpayer dollars to come into our great state when they will ban, boycott and take away major meetings, corporations and events because of our Republican majorities and sound policies? #BadIdea”
This is interesting 🤨. I serve as the Chairman of the House Rules Committee. I have never discussed a deal, agreed to a deal or been part of some secretive deal to move certain Senator’s special interest bills that are fat, bloated and in some instances likely unconstitutional.
Those weren’t the only serious breaks from presenting a unified Republican front on the budget. Several individual Republican legislators vocalized dissatisfaction with the budget emphatically on social media and during committee votes.
As the majority, the GOP will have to resolve those opposed within its membership if it hopes to secure the budget’s passage before the new fiscal year begins next Friday, July 1.
Among those opposed to the budget are State Senator Michelle Ugenti-Rita (R-Scottsdale). She asserted that the budget wasn’t fiscally responsible in the face of a looming recession. Ugenti-Rita scorned provisions of the bill as “pet projects” for fellow members.
I can’t think of anything more fiscally irresponsible than spending recklessly on member pet projects while Arizonans struggle to keep up with crushing inflation.
— Michelle Ugenti-RITA (@MichelleUgenti) June 21, 2022
That contradicted how State Representative Regina Cobb (R-Kingman) characterized the budget during the House Appropriations Committee on Tuesday. Cobb said that the proposed budget bills would afford the state with an 8 to 10 percent cushion — enough to “weather the storm” of a pending recession, asserting repeatedly that paying off the pension debt and rollovers would remove troublesome burdens in coming years.
“Are we going to flatline tomorrow or July 1? Absolutely not, but we’ve projected it to be fiscally conservative,” said Cobb. “I think if we’re going into a recession, we’re paying off a lot of debt that could be hanging over our heads during a recession.”
State Representative Jake Hoffman (R-Queen Creek) also opposed the budget. He declared that the budget would only worsen an impending sustained recession and current, serious economic destruction. Hoffman criticized the raises to state employees and judges of up to 15 percent. Although Hoffman was the only Republican committee member to vote against the bill, the legislator said that the budget doesn’t reflect the majority’s platform.
“Everything in [our constituents’] lives are going up, and they’re not getting raises right now. If they are, they’re under the inflation rate,” said Hoffman.
Arizona Free Enterprise Club, a free market policy and advocacy organization, asserted that extraneous funding for agendas contrary to the interests of Arizonans were sprinkled into the budget. In a statement to AZ Free News, President Scot Mussi declared that the budget largely fulfilled Democrats’ wishlist.
“The proposed budget deal includes hundreds of millions in new spending, subsidies for Hollywood liberals to make movies, tax hikes for a Green New Deal transit plan in Maricopa County and special interest pork to buy Democrat votes,” said Mussi. “We should be working toward a budget that has full Republican support, not a Build Back Broke budget supported by Democrats.”
By and large, Democrats focused their comments Tuesday on lamenting the budget’s K-12 spending. Some accused the budget’s design as a “shell game.” Several noted that they didn’t like the idea of funding more border security.
One of the most vocal opponents of the budget, State Representative Kelli Butler (D-Paradise Valley), called the ongoing revenue calculations “irresponsible” during committee. Butler also said that she and a majority of Arizona voters wanted $1 billion for K-12 education. Butler accused the budget of shell games related to taxation that made education funding more vulnerable.
Despite the ongoing economic turmoil and near-universal expectation of a recession, Butler asserted that the economy was “thriving.” Butler also took issue with the fact that she was still getting briefings by midnight and memos from staff at one am early Tuesday, arguing that no legislators had time to figure out what’s all in the budget.
⚠️There may be an #azleg House Appropriations special committee tomorrow at 8am. Bills have not been made public or provided to Democrats yet, but the GOP passed a floor motion for the Approps committee to hear measures “relating to revenues and expenditures.” 🤷♀️ Stay tuned. pic.twitter.com/dSYJY9xBc9
Present at the State Capitol were educator activists with the Arizona Education Association (AEA) rallying for more teacher pay using the $5.3 billion surplus.
Those for the budget praised it for getting more things right to address the state’s current needs. One Democrat, State Representative Cesár Chávez (D-Maryvale) signaled support for the budget, pointing out during committee that the legislature had a little over a week before its deadline for the budget hits. He concurred with his Democratic peers that K-12 education needed a “true, historic investment,” but that he had a responsibility to make the budget work ahead of the deadline.
State Representative Michelle Udall (R-Mesa) offered a list of positives within the budget solving statewide problems: over $1 billion to solve water supply problems; over $1.6 billion overall increase in K12 spending, which meted out to $750 per pupil or a $23,000 increase per classroom; over $1 billion in debt payoff in unfunded liabilities and pensions; over $1 billion increase in public safety (police, fires, courts); and over $500 million to increase health care like in diabetes management training and postpartum care.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
