A contentious fight is brewing in the Arizona legislature, the possible reauthorization of the Arizona Commerce Authority (ACA). Governor Hobbs has made the reauthorization a top priority of her administration this session, mentioning it in her State of the State address. But the debate has an ironic element considering the history of its inception.
In 2011, the state was crawling out of a crippling recession, having lost literally hundreds of thousands of jobs and even selling off the state Capitol buildings to dig out of a deficit. The legislature, in collaboration with the Brewer Administration, introduced an omnibus bill sold as a “jobs package” which refashioned the bureaucratic Department of Commerce into the Arizona Commerce Authority, and incorporated both new targeted tax credit programs and incentives, as well as phased in corporate income and commercial property tax cuts.
Democrats a Decade Ago Opposed the ACA
The bill at the time was uniformly opposed by Democrats, including then Representative Katie Hobbs. Republicans mostly coalesced around the bill, with a handful of key conservatives voting in opposition of the legislation, largely in protest of the corporate welfare and multi-million-dollar “deal closing” fund with no legislative oversight. For those unfamiliar with the deal closing fund, it is a large pot of money appropriated to the Director of the Commerce Authority to throw at corporations to convince them to relocate to Arizona.
After the ACA was passed and signed into law, it would seem that only a few conservative voices and the Club itself would prove prophetic at the lack of oversight and inevitable gift clause violations, which is a constitutional protection from the government subsidizing private industry…
For the past thirty years or so the left has invented a narrative that there are two Americas. A group of very super-rich people (the one percenters) who have prospered over the past several decades, and everyone else who has gotten poorer. It’s a fairy tale narrative because almost all Americans have seen financial progress. The median household income adjusted for inflation rose by more than 40% since 1984.
Prosperity isn’t an “us versus them” zero-sum game. A rising tide really does lift all boats.
But there really are Two Americas today. First, there are the cultural and over-educated snobs – the kind of people who religiously read the New York Times, drive EVs, wear Harvard or Yale sweaters, and have never even heard of NASCAR or eaten at Popeyes or ridden a John Deere tractor.
And then there is normal main street America. The snobs thumb their collective noses at the unrefined working-class Americans. The elites believe they are intellectually, culturally, and morally superior to the working class and rural America. You won’t see too many elites at a Trump rally with 30,000 people.
A group I helped found, the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, just published a study entitled “Them Vs. U.S.” examining how America’s cultural elites (defined as at least one postgraduate degree, $150,000+ annual income, high-density urban residence, and attended an Ivy League school) are hopelessly out of touch with ordinary Americans. Pollster Scott Rasmussen did the research.
Here are some of the key jaw-dropping revelations from the survey:
Financial Well-being: Nearly three-quarters of the elites surveyed, believe they are better off now financially than they were when Joe Biden entered the White House. Less than 20% of ordinary Americans feel the same way.
Individual Freedom: Elites are three times more likely than all Americans to say there is too much individual freedom in the country. Astonishingly, almost half of the elites and almost six-of-ten ivy leaguers say there is too much freedom.
Climate Change: An astonishing 72% of the Elites – including 81% of the Elites who graduated from the top universities – favor banning gas cars. And majorities of elites would ban gas stoves, non-essential air travel, SUVs, and private air conditioning. That means no air travel with the kids to Disney World.
Education: Most elites think that teachers unions and school administrators should control the agenda of schools. Most mainstream Americans think that parents should make these decisions.
Oh, and about three-quarters of these cultural elites are Biden supporters. Surprised?
The Grand Canyon-sized divide between the elites in America and ordinary Americans is so profound that it is as if they live in two different countries. Silicon Valley, Manhattan, and Washington, D.C. have become bubbles that have lost contact with everyday Americans. This explains why the political class – which is a big part of the elite group – is confused by poll numbers showing that voters are feeling financially stressed out. The elites are doing fine, so they believe that everyone is prospering. I suspect that most don’t want radical change in the public schools because their kids attend blue-chip private schools. They are fine with abolishing SUVs because in big cities Americans generally don’t drive those cars – if they drive cars at all.
Crime, illegal immigration, inflation, fentanyl, and factory closings aren’t keeping the elite up at night because in their cocoons they don’t encounter these problems on a daily basis the way so many Americans do today. Not too many main street Americans are losing sleep about climate change or LGBTQ issues.
The elites in America tend to work in the “talking professions” – university professors, journalists, lawyers, actors, and lobbyists. They keep talking and normal Americans are more than ever not listening to them.
Stephen Moore is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, co-founder of the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, and chief economist with FreedomWorks.
The Iranian mullahs must be thrilled at the progress they are making on obtaining nuclear capability. It represents the realization of their millennia-old ambition to turn the world into an Islamic caliphate. The world should be thoroughly alarmed.
The West seemingly insists on not paying much attention, but observant Muslims, which is most of them, make no bones about it. It is a tenet of the faith that eventually all non-Muslims will convert, die, or live in subjugation to Muslims. It is the duty of all faithful Muslims to devote their life to jihad, i.e. striving to bring about that day when sharia law rules the world.
Islam’s lack of success so far is mostly because they lack the infrastructure necessary to support such a sustained, massive effort. Like the Soviet communists, their ideology creates the economic conditions which make it difficult to advance their cause. The mullahs blame us, chanting “Death to America” and meaning it.
Until now, nations that have attained nuclear capability, starting with the United States, have at least to some degree recognized the awesome responsibility of having weapons so massively destructive that their deployment could set off a conflagration ending civilization as we know it. The greatest threat ever may be that fanatical Muslims, who have no respect for human life or even their own people, and who despise the values of Western civilization, will obtain nuclear capability.
So, faced with such obvious mortal danger, America’s leaders are doing everything they can to prevent Iran from getting the bomb, right? Almost unbelievably, President Biden is still working to relax enforcement of sanctions and to provide enabling funds to Iran.
This glaring error goes back to 2015 and Barack Obama’s belief that a policy of appeasement, rather than confrontation, was the best way to make an ally of the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism. For Obama and his advisors, negotiating the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the “nuclear deal”) was also the way to right our past injustices to Iran.
“I do think you have to have the capacity to put yourself occasionally in their shoes,” Obama said, always willing to stick up for Muslims while deeming America just another nation with nothing especially remarkable about it.
Obama’s plan to produce an equilibrium of forces and thus stability in the Middle East by increasing Iran’s access to resources and its standing in the Middle East was an unqualified failure. Lifting sanctions, terminating Justice Department operations against Iran, and requiring the Defense Department to work cooperatively with a sworn enemy craving nuclear capability predictably produced the opposite – more terrorism, more nuclear development, and more hostility to the U.S.
Still, the American Left offered yet more support for Iran despite the fact that under the nuclear deal we moved ever closer to facing a belligerent, nuclear armed, and irrational enemy. Reversing Trump was all that mattered.
In 2022, Iran faced severe internal disruption due to its brutal treatment of women under sharia law. But instead of supporting the uprising or even letting it play out, the White House offered sanctions relief to prop up Iran’s Revolutionary Guard and slipped a note to Iran’s government to assure them we still supported the nuclear deal.
In 2023, the Obama/Biden team stubbornly continued to do about everything possible to subsidize Iran’s nuclear ambitions including:
releasing $20 billion from the International Monetary Fund.
using a sanctions waiver to allow Iran to move $10 billion out of Iraq.
ending sanctions on oil sales which produce $30 million of annual revenue for Iran.
releasing $6 billion in oil revenue from South Korea.
Even the October 7 massacre and over 100 continued attacks on American military installations didn’t stop Biden from allowing the UN missile embargo on Iran to expire. Plus, just to show there were no hard feelings apparently about attacking our ships in the Red Sea, we granted a waiver to allow Iran to access $10 billion more from Iraq.
Why do our leaders insist on enabling Iran’s nuclear dreams and subsidizing terror? Do they honestly believe we can achieve peace through weakness?
This isn’t partisan bickering. Our bumbler-in-chief has put America in a very dangerous position.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
In whatever field you work for, can you imagine doing your job with one hand tied behind your back? What about both hands tied behind your back? Well, for the Phoenix Police Department this is no longer an “imagination,” this is their reality.
For the past 2 years, the Department of Justice has been investigating the Phoenix PD on the basis of allegations against the department regarding use of force, retaliation to protestors, and mistreating the homeless. For 2 years the Phoenix PD has been fully compliant with their investigation as stated by the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association in an open letter to Mayor Kate Gallego;“Because the city and it’s police department have nothing to hide, you have cooperated with every aspect of the DOJ’s investigation thus far – rightly so, and with our full support.”
However, the Phoenix PD, in that same open letter, conveyed their dismay to Mayor Gallego; “I write to you today on behalf of PLEA, United Phoenix Firefighters Local 493, AFSCME 2384, AFSCME 2960, ASPTEA and neighborhood groups Operation Blue Ribbon, Violence Impact Coalition, and Phoenix Mid-Century Modern Neighborhood Association to express our concerns about the direction of the DOJ investigation and its implications for the future of the City of Phoenix.”The Department of Justice, after concluding their “investigation,” has recommended—as they always seem to do—a consent decree go in effect for the Phoenix PD.
Now, why is this such a bad thing? Why are people against this? Here are a few of the reasons.
At What Cost
Let’s start with the most obvious reason taxpayers and residents of Phoenix oppose this. The financial burden on the City of Phoenix would be astronomical, costing the city $10 million alone for the court ordered monitor required by the consent decree. The rest of the cost widely depends on the length a consent decree is in effect for, but the Seattle PD, which has a consent decree, has spent $100 million so far. And that number continues to climb as the consent decree remains in place. I am sure you can see why taxpayers would be against this.
“I’m From the Government, and I’m Here to Help”
If the cost alone isn’t enough to sway you, then let’s look back on Ronald Reagan’s famous quote that the “nine most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.’” This is exactly what is going on in Phoenix. There really is no reason that someone from another state or the federal government should be dictating or instructing officers within the Phoenix PD. This takes away our state and local sovereignty. While the Phoenix PD is not perfect, they have taken actions and steps to improve and make policy and training changes when necessary. For the DOJ to come in and overreach in such a way, costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, is grossly inappropriate.
The CRIME, Need More Be Said?
If you look at cities that have a consent decree in place, violent crime has skyrocketed! In a statement, about a survey of officers within the Phoenix PD, the President of the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association said, “In [the survey], we asked what the members felt would happen to crime if a consent decree was implemented. 93.73% said crime would rise either somewhat or substantially. That is in line with what we have seen across the country.”In that same survey, officers were asked how likely they would be to retire if a consent decree were to go in effect for Phoenix PD. The President of the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association shared the results, saying, “Here in Phoenix, we are approximately 600 short of the max staffing of 3,125. In a recent survey, PLEA asked members how likely they would be to retire or resign if a consent decree was implemented in Phoenix. 12.57% responded that they would definitely retire or resign, while another 30.26% said they would strongly consider retiring or resigning. 42.87% is a concerning number!” Phoenix already has rising crime rates. We cannot afford to lose more officers. We need to gain more!
This Affects Us ALL
If you don’t live in Phoenix, why should you care? Phoenix is the 5th largest police department in the U.S. If the DOJ can do this to Phoenix, what will stop them from coming to Chandler, Gilbert, Mesa, Scottsdale, or other cities in the valley? Not only that, but if crime rates soar in Phoenix, that will certainly flow into neighboring cities. As the residency rates rise in Arizona, crime is bound to rise too, but so far Arizona has remained a decently safe state to live. However, if this consent decree goes in effect, there’s no telling how bad it could get.
Speed, Speed, Speed
After a slow and drawn-out investigation, speed seems to be the name of the game for the DOJ all of a sudden. After the DOJ concluded its two-year investigation, it brought its recommendation to the city council and for a decision within 48 hours. Many council members were frustrated and curious as to why an outside entity came into their city and demanded action in 48 hours when they themselves got 2 years to do their investigation. As Phoenix Councilwoman Ann O’Brien said, “Phoenix has been transparent and collaborative, now it’s time for the DOJ to do the same.”
This Is Nonpartisan
This is a non-partisan issue that affects all Arizonans, and we need you in this fight. Even the Maricopa County Sheriff Paul Penzone, a Democrat, has announced his resignation because of the lack of ability to run his office due to this consent decree. That’s why I encourage everyone in our state to go to community forums hosted by the Phoenix PD and voice your concerns. The future of our state may depend on it.
Joseph Yang is a young community leader and grassroots activist. He currently runs a community organization and serves on the Chandler Police Review Panel. Joseph is the Founder of the East Valley Young Republicans and current assistant state advisor for the TeenAge Republicans. He hosts a show called “The Conservative Seoul Show” that you can find here.
If any business owner saw 450% growth in one of the company’s products or programs during a 15-month period, they would be ecstatic. And it’s safe to say that whatever that program was doing must be working. But for Governor Katie Hobbs and her allies in the teachers’ unions, who have never been known for their math skills, it’s a completely different story when it comes to the ESA program.
Back in July 2022, when then-Governor Doug Ducey signed universal school choice expansion into Arizona law, 13,400 students were enrolled in the ESA program. That number has now grown—as of January 16, 2024—to an astounding 73,415 students—a near 450% growth. Clearly, the program is in high demand, and it is definitely working. But after signing the Republican budget bill last year, without any cap or restrictions on ESAs, Hobbs is now trying to push a barrage of regulations that would effectively dismantle the popular program…
With the New Year upon us, the freedom to freelance will surely be under attack in 2024 just as it has been throughout the Biden reign on a variety of fronts—be it the impending regulatory restrictions soon to be imposed by the U.S. Department of Labor, or prospective bills seeking to limit independent contracting in states like Minnesota and Michigan.
Meanwhile, the ongoing destruction of the independent workforce in California is still unfolding in real-time, thanks to the disastrous AB5 law enacted in 2020, a law so restrictive that it has put hundreds of thousands of Californians out of business across a vast swath of professions.
Proponents of these onerous labor laws have seized on a new tactic to hijack the “flexibility” argument from those of us who advocate for self-employment. They assume that flexibility is our sole reason for desiring freelance careers—whether it’s a single mom needing to stay at home with the kids, or a person with a chronic illness unable to participate in the traditional workplace, to name a few.
While flexibility is just one factor that makes independent contracting appealing, it’s not the “be-all-end-all” for why millions of Americans choose to be in business for themselves. The anti-freelancer forces cite current work trends that began during the pandemic when employees discovered the convenience of at-home work arrangements, equating this to flexibility. But these remote-work arrangements are not the same as being your own boss. Not by a long shot.
For freelance journalist JoBeth McDaniel, the ability to pick and choose clients is imperative, along with being able to charge top rates per project. Also important: not having to be beholden to a single employer or difficult boss.
“I choose self-employment in part due to harassment I endured as a low-level employee in my 20s,” said Daniel. “When you’re a small business, it’s a simple matter to replace one bad client with nine or more others wanting to work with you.”
Another benefit of being your own boss is the opportunity to avoid workplace discrimination, particularly for seniors like audio-visual tech Roger Zeilinski, who lost his career in California due to AB5. “No one wants to hire a senior like me as a full- or part-timer because of the added costs for healthcare, liability, and workers’ comp,” he said.
With ageism rampant in corporate America, professionals in their 50s, 60s, and 70s like Roger find themselves completely shut out of the job market in favor of younger workers. With self-employment, however, age is often not a factor. Certified Medical Transcriptionist Debbie Gosselin lets her work speak for itself: “In most instances,” she said, “my clients don’t even know my age because is irrelevant.”
For writers, journalists, cartoonists, and graphic designers, independent contracting allows an individual to retain intellectual property rights. Freelance writer/photographer Kristina Anderson posed this scenario: “Imagine a newspaper columnist wanting to compile her columns into a published book, or a still photographer who desires to sell their images to another outlet. If I were an employee, those options are off the table, as the copyright belongs to the publisher and not the original creator.”
For those who file Schedule C on their federal tax returns, deducting expenses is crucial, especially if expensive equipment is required in a particular field such as independent filmmaking. Prior to AB5, film producer Dan Cheatham could write off his office costs, vehicle usage, fuel, software, hardware, equipment, healthcare, and self-advertising. “AB5 is poison for the self-employed in California unless we are willing to just volunteer our services and turn this into art for art’s sake,” he said.
Finally, the opportunity to hone one’s craft is inherent in the freedom to freelance. Whether it’s a videographer working with different clients in different settings, a writer growing their skill sets to include photography and web design, or a wedding vendor expanding her offerings, the chance to try on different hats is one of many essential attributes of being self-employed.
According to Gail Gordon, executive director of Numi Opera in Los Angeles, an aspiring opera singer can perform as a freelancer in a mid-tier opera company in hopes of someday joining a major opera house. “Freelancing opens up new horizons and new career opportunities for up-and-coming artists,” she said. “Laws like AB5 take that all away.”
This New Year, the opportunity to freelance will be more essential than ever, be it a full-time career or a side hustle to supplement one’s income. Here’s to hoping the Biden administration will cease and desist its continued assault on legitimate, thriving independent contractors just to appease the selfish wish list of organized labor.
Karen Anderson is a contributor to the Daily Caller News Foundation, a visiting fellow at Independent Women’s Forum (iwf.org), and the founder of Freelancers Against AB5.
