Rep. Blattman Receives Support From Climate Groups Hoping To Push Green New Deal In Arizona

Rep. Blattman Receives Support From Climate Groups Hoping To Push Green New Deal In Arizona

by | Aug 14, 2024 | News

By Staff Reporter |

A middle-of-the-road legislative district in the Phoenix-metro area will be key to deciding the future political makeup of the Arizona State Legislature.

State Representative Seth Blattman, a Democrat, is running for reelection in Arizona Legislative District 9.

The Democrat lawmaker has been endorsed by liberal groups in his reelection bid, including National Organization for Women Arizona, AEA Fund for Public Education, the Progressive Turnout Project, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Jane Fonda Climate PAC, Save Our Schools Arizona, and Stonewall Democrats of Arizona.

Blattman’s support from the Fonda PAC may be one of the most concerning for voters researching his record and determining which direction they want to see for their district. On August 7, Blattman boasted of this endorsement, saying, “I am incredibly honored to announce the endorsement by the Jane Fonda Climate PAC! Their tireless efforts in combating climate change and advocating for sustainable policies are crucial for our planet’s future. Together, let’s create a healthier and sustainable Arizona for generations to come.”

The mission of the PAC, however, is not as agreeable to a wide swath of constituents. On her website, Fonda writes, “Our planet is on fire and our leaders are failing us, so if we can’t change the minds of the people in power, we need to change the people in power. It is for that reason that I started Jane Fonda Climate PAC, which is laser-focused on one goal: Do what it takes to defeat fossil fuel supporters and elect climate champions at all levels of government.”

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 U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, who is one of the most progressive lawmakers in the U.S. Congress. On Sanders’ presidential campaign website, he wrote about the deal, that “the climate crisis is not only the single greatest challenge facing our country; it is also our single greatest opportunity to build a more just and equitable future, but we must act immediately.”

Sanders added that as president he would “launch the decade of the Green New Deal, a ten-year, nationwide mobilization centered around justice and equity during which climate change will be factored into virtually every area of policy, from immigration to trade to foreign policy and beyond. Part of the details of the Green New Deal, according to Sanders, includes, “declaring climate change a national emergency, commit[ing] to reducing emissions throughout the world, [and] expanding the climate justice movement.”

Though Arizona has so far resisted an extreme move to the globalist agenda of the climate change lobby – thanks, in large part, to its previous Republican governors (Brewer and Ducey) and a Republican-led legislature – Blattman’s recent votes indicate that he might help usher in more of the Green New Deal policies should Democrats retake the legislature alongside Governor Katie Hobbs. He voted against HCR 2050, which would have “constitutionally prohibit[ed] Arizona or any political subdivision or public body of Arizona from restricting the manufacture, use or sale or a device based on the energy sources used to power the device.”

Additionally, Blattman voted against HCR 2018, which would have “prohibit[ed] this state and any city, town, county, municipal corporation or other political subdivision of this state from imposing a fee or tax based on vehicle miles traveled by a person in a motor vehicle or enacting any rule or law to monitor or limit the vehicle miles traveled by a person in a motor vehicle.”

Another of Blattman’s endorsements, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, also highlights its efforts to fight for the Green New Deal. The organization promotes itself as “a proud supporter of Elizabeth Warren since her first run for Senate and was the first national political organization to endorse her for president in the 2020 election.”

Warren, also one of the most liberal and progressive members of the U.S. Congress, presents herself as a top supporter of the Green New Deal. On her campaign website, Warren writes, “This is a crisis. We need bold, aggressive action. We need a Green New Deal – and we need it now. Elizabeth is proud to be an original cosponsor of Senator Ed Markey and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal resolution, which commits the United States to a ten-year mobilization to achieve domestic net-zero emissions by 2030. It provides the framework for an ambitious effort to transform our economy and save our planet.”

According to the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, Legislative District 9 is one of the most competitive in the entire state, with a 2.6% vote spread between Democrats and Republicans in the past nine statewide elections. In those contests, Democrats have emerged victorious five times, compared to four for Republicans.

Blattman will attempt to return to the Arizona House of Representatives alongside his seatmate, Lorena Austin. The two Democrats are facing off against Republicans Mary Ann Mendoza and Kylie Barber for the right to represent the district in its two slots.

AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.

Threats to the Court Are the Real Threat to Democracy

Threats to the Court Are the Real Threat to Democracy

by | Sep 16, 2022 | Opinion

By Dr. Thomas Patterson |

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, with the concurrence of much of the Left, believes our democracy is once again under attack, this time from our own “rogue” Supreme Court. MSNBC agreed that “the Supreme Court has gone rogue.” The Congressional Progressive Caucus insists “we must hold these rogue justices to account.”

It goes beyond coordinated hysterical rhetoric. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez demanded that Democratic Party leaders share their plans for “solving the problem of the rogue Court.” The New York Times advised “the Constitution provides a number of paths by which Congress can restrain and discipline a rogue Court.” Senator Sheldon Whitehouse introduced the Supreme Court Review Act to “check the Court’s rogue decisions.”

From the Left’s point-of-view, not only is the Court rogue, but so are the six justices who normally form the majority. According to protesters at a recent anti-Court rally, Roberts is an “impotent fool,” Kavanaugh a “drunken rapist,” and Thomas a “traitor and perv.” “Strong women scare” Alito. Gorsuch “stole his seat.” Barrett is in “an actual cult.”

Scholars like Berkeley Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky write that none of the justices should be there. Georgia State Law professor Eric Segall argues that the Court’s illegitimate rulings should just be ignored.

But what rulings from this last term were radical, extra-legal interpretations of the Constitution? Here are some of the purportedly rogue rulings:

    • An administrative agency must have congressional authority to make far-reaching decisions.
    • If states subsidize students in private schools, they can’t exclude religious schools.
    • Since the Constitution is silent on abortion regulation, per the 10th Amendment, states retain the authority.
    • The Second Amendment actually prescribes the right to bear arms.

Reasonable people can disagree with these as policy prescriptions. However, the rulings are hardly constitutionally outrageous by any standard. They are not even that politically unpopular, except on the activist Left.

Still, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre claimed, with no substantiation attempted, that overturning Roe v. Wade was an “unconstitutional action.” But most Court critics don’t argue about constitutionality. They simply don’t like the results of the rulings.

Americans have politicized the Court through failure to understand its role and purpose. Commentators commonly characterize justices as liberal or conservative, implying their personal ideologies are the legitimate basis of their judicial opinions. Sometimes they’re even referred to as Democrat or Republican.

Indeed, Barack Obama, himself a former constitutional law professor, wanted his Supreme Court nominees to “understand that justice isn’t about some abstract legal theory.” Rather, they should have “empathy…understanding and identifying with peoples’ hopes and struggles.”

But as the late Justice Antonin Scalia pointed out, there are fundamentally two grounds for federal court rulings: the text of the Constitution and laws or…what? Ideological chaos where ultimately the personal opinions of the judges prevail.

Americans not only tolerate this practice, they demand it. Partisans fully expect the Court to protect their ideological interests, to be their backup when the legislative process fails to produce the desired results.

Thus, another critic claims the current Court is deemed to have rogue status because it “acted under conservative control, as if it stands above the constitutional system, unaccountable to anyone other than itself.” But the Court by design is not supposed to be “accountable” to the political process.

Justices don’t face elections precisely so that they can be an independent third branch. They are free to protect minority rights and serve as a check against populist excesses in the democratically elected branches.

In return for their independence, judges bear a solemn responsibility to follow the Constitution. Any other course leads to government by black-robed tyrants not subject to any checks or balances.

In our cancel culture, justices have been seriously threatened with physical harm. Leftist politicians have proposed structural reforms like packing the Court, blowing it up, or ignoring it. But these are dangerous threats to the rule of law.

Those unhappy with the current Court’s decisions should utilize the traditional means available to effect change. Amend the Constitution, change the laws, appoint new judges when the time comes.

An independent judiciary is a hallmark of all successful democracies. Attempts to punish and threaten judges for their decisions is the real threat to our republic.

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.