Amish Shah Bashes Tax Cuts, Capitalism, And Reagan In Unearthed Video

Amish Shah Bashes Tax Cuts, Capitalism, And Reagan In Unearthed Video

By Matthew Holloway |

Democratic Candidate for Congressional District 1 Amish Shah was revealed to have attacked former President Ronald Reagan and the entire system of capitalism in a recently uncovered video from 2018.

In the video footage, Shah is heard to say, “What we’ve got is an economic system here that isn’t fair. People have started to realize this finally after years. What happened with Ronald Reagan starting to cut taxes on the very, very wealthy has now given us the society we have, and this is what the real travesty is.”

In full, Shah offered a distinctly socialist rebuke of Reagan-era conservative reforms, tax cuts that objectively revived the U.S. economy after the disastrous Carter Administration.

“We’re institutionalizing inequality this… this is what we’re doing. Um, what… what we’ve got is an economic system here that isn’t fair,” Shah said.

He then began to outline a socialist solution:

“And, and, and this is what the real travesty is: lack of good healthcare for example. Um… an expensive healthcare strips people of assets. Not having affordable education then takes those people and puts them at, those kids, and puts them at a massive disadvantage. And there you go.

What you’re going to get is people without opportunity and then finding themselves in a place where they can’t make ends meet. And we’re funding a school to prison pipeline and …and that’s, that’s not right. That’s, that’s just morally, uh, objectionable way for a society to run.

And so I’m… I’m happy that what we’re seeing within the democratic party is a… a huge progressive movement that’s coming up and saying this is wrong and we’re going to do something about it.”

Shah’s views do not appear to have changed. In a recent debate featuring Shah, he explained his class warfare argument and even vowed to raise taxes on Arizonans. “I’m not in favor of extending the Trump tax cuts because a lot of the folks that were helped by those were wealthy,” said Shah.

NRCC Spokesperson Ben Petersen criticized Shah heavily in a statement, “Amish Shah’s extreme vow to axe the Trump tax cuts represents a declaration of war on Arizonans’ livelihoods. Shah’s class warfare campaign and support for socialism are disqualifying in the first district.”

As previously reported by the New York Post, Shah’s heavily radicalized socialist background has caused significant controversy in recent weeks as ties to Senator Bernie Sanders found him endorsing single-payer socialized medicine.

He recently ran afoul of the City of Tempe for use of mailers depicting a retired Tempe Police officer in full uniform in violation of A.R.S. 9-500.14, which forbids the use of city resources to influence an election.

And further reporting from the Washington Free Beacon also uncovered his rental of a modest condominium in his district and listing of that address for voter registration purposes, instead of his primary residence located in the neighboring third district, in possible violation of Arizona law.

Matthew Holloway is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.

Americans Agree: We Cannot Afford Four More Years Of This

Americans Agree: We Cannot Afford Four More Years Of This

By Congresswoman Debbie Lesko |

Recently, Tim Walz said the quiet part out loud, declaring, “We can’t afford four more years of this.” When Walz and JD Vance face off on the debate stage this week, this is one statement they will both agree on: Americans can’t afford four more years of the Biden-Harris agenda transformed to a Harris-Walz Administration.

As we and others around us grapple with skyrocketing inflation, depleting savings accounts, soaring interest rates, and wages unable to keep pace with the financial ruins from the Biden-Harris agenda, Tim Walz is right – Americans cannot afford four more years of Democrat failed policies. We’ve heard time and time again that Kamala is from a middle-class family. However, Harris continues to be oblivious to the consequences of her failed economic policies that impact our families at the grocery store, gas stations, and electricity bills. It seems she’s the only self-identified ‘middle-class’ person who is immune to the inflation crisis that she and President Joe Biden have created.

Here are the inconvenient facts for Harris and Walz. Inflation has cost the average Arizona household nearly $27,000. Everything from energy to food has dramatically increased in price. Our electric bills are up 30%, and gas prices are up 46%. Putting food on the table is increasingly expensive as grocery prices have spiked 21% since President Donald J. Trump left office. Under Biden-Harris, nothing in our lives is immune to inflation, which is a hidden tax on every American. And for growing families, everyday baby essentials have skyrocketed, with a pack of diapers increased by 32% and baby food up by nearly 12%.

While men and women are paying more for just about everything, we are also taking home less after inflation. Families around the nation have had to take out additional lines of credit just to make ends meet. Now, nearly four years into the Biden-Harris failed economy, those credit cards are maxed out, with debt reaching a record high of $1.14 trillion. Thanks to Kamalanomics, one in five Americans’ credit cards are maxed out.

Arizonans are at their breaking point, and the 2024 Democrat ticket will only make these economic crises worse. A Harris-Walz agenda is a page out of the socialist playbook. Between their costly Soviet-style price controls and a tax on small businesses that is higher than the tax rate in China, the Democrats’ agenda puts America last.

Don’t take my word for it; it was Tim Walz himself who once said, “One person’s socialism is another person’s neighborliness.” He also told business leaders, “We’re not taxing people–we’re taxing businesses.” Walz clearly doesn’t understand basic economics. When you tax a business, they pass that cost onto consumers.

These price controls and record-high tax rates will decimate what’s left of the American economy. But it’s not just our pocketbooks that are at risk. Walz, like Kamala, is a far-left radical socialist.

Together, they are the most liberal presidential ticket in history.

Tim Walz has a long record as Minnesota Governor that shows us how he would assist Kamala Harris in their shared mission of destroying our country. At a time when families are struggling to make ends meet, Tim Walz will help usher in his Electric Vehicle mandate nationwide, requiring Americans to drive unaffordable electric cars that cost on average $56,575, which is over the average yearly salary in Arizona.

Tim Walz has a history of implementing unconstitutional mandates and socialist policies. Walz mandated lockdown long after Covid-19 ended, keeping children out of schools, and promoting the vaccine for children as young as six years old. During the lockdowns, Tim Walz even created a hotline to snitch on people who defied his ‘stay at home order,’ an authoritarian move that took officers from fighting crime to making criminals out of church services, and business owners who did not strictly follow masking rules – a power trip that turned Minnesota into North Korea.

Walz is no less radical on immigration and border security. As Governor, he signed legislation to provide free taxpayer-funded healthcare to illegal immigrants, and he celebrated issuing driver’s licenses and car registrations to over 81,000 illegal immigrants in his state. Going even further, Walz granted illegals access to free college tuition. It’s clear that he puts illegals above American citizens. In response to President Trump’s border wall, Tim Walz said he would invest in ladders so that unvetted illegal migrants could still come over. It’s hard to believe that this current crisis at the border could get much worse, but it definitely would under the Harris-Walz Administration!

Additionally, Walz and Harris’ radical defund-the-police ticket should concern every community in Arizona and around the country. Just a handful of years ago, Walz essentially stood by while his own cities burned down and businesses were looted and violently destroyed, and then Kamala Harris helped raise money to bail the criminals out of jail. They make quite a team in these and many more areas. Americans be warned: this is what would be heading to our Arizona cities if this weak, failed, and dangerously liberal ticket has its way.

Americans can’t afford to send the most radical socialist ticket in U.S. history to the White House. With days left until election day, we must vote for a strong economy, safety in our communities, and a secure border. To do that, we must send tested and proven leaders to the White House—Donald J. Trump and J.D. Vance. Let’s make the right decision for the future of our great nation!

Congresswoman Debbie Lesko represents Arizona’s 8th Congressional District. She is currently running for Maricopa County Supervisor in District 4

Rep. Austin’s First Term Features Radical Socialism And No Mercy For Families Struggling With Economy

Rep. Austin’s First Term Features Radical Socialism And No Mercy For Families Struggling With Economy

By Staff Reporter |

A radical Democrat state representative is attempting to return to her middle-of-the-road legislative district for a new term in office.

State Representative Lorena Austin is running for reelection in Arizona Legislative District 9, which covers the city of Mesa. According to the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, the district is likely one of the most competitive in the state, with a 2.6% vote spread in the Commission’s nine focus elections. Democrats are slightly favored in the district, having won in five of those nine focus elections.

Despite her district being more moderate in its political makeup, Austin has demonstrated a propensity to become one of the most extreme leftist members of the Arizona Legislature on almost every issue.

In a struggling state and national economy, where many families are struggling to get by in life, keep their jobs, and save for their children’s futures, Austin showed no mercy with her votes. This year, she was one of a handful of members to vote against HCR 2002, which stated that the legislature recognizes, encourages, and continues to support Arizona’s beef producing farmers, ranchers, and families. Last year (2023), she voted no on SB 1131, which would have prohibited a county, city, or town from levying a tax on rental property.

Austin is also opposed to individual property rights, as her votes have indicated. In 2023, she was one of 14 members to vote against final passage of a bill prohibiting protestors from targeting people in their own homes by protesting on their residential property (SB 1023).

This latest legislative session (2024), Austin voted no on SB 1129, which would have allowed a property owner or the owners’ agent to request from law enforcement the immediate removal of a person who is unlawfully occupying a residential dwelling. She also opposed SB 1073, which would have established a new form of the existing offense of obstructing a highway or other public thoroughfare and classified this new form of the offense as a class 6 felony (which was introduced in response to protestors blocking traffic).

Austin’s legislative record extends, too, into bouts of radical socialism. In 2023, she co-sponsored HB 2610, which would have created a state-owned bank. Additionally, she co-sponsored HB 2653, which would have established that “restaurants and other food service establishments in this state may only serve water and disposable straws to customers on request.” Earlier this year, Austin voted no on HB 2629, which would have established November 7 of each year as Victims of Communism Day and required the State Board of Education to create a list of recommended resources for mandatory instruction on the topic in certain public school courses.

The Democrat lawmaker has refused to support solutions to help her state end the border crisis affecting almost every community in Arizona – not to mention elsewhere in the nation. In 2023, Austin co-sponsored HB 2604, which would have permitted the Arizona Department of Transportation to issue a driver’s license or nonoperating ID to a person without legal status in the United States. And in this most recent legislative session, she voted no on HB 2621, which would have deemed that the trafficking of fentanyl across Arizona’s border is a public health crisis and directed the Arizona Department of Health Services to do everything within its power to address the crisis. She also opposed SCR 1042, which proclaimed the legislature’s support for the people and government of the state of Texas in its efforts to secure our nation’s southern border.

Austin has an awful record in office on crimes against children. In 2023, she voted against SB 1028, which would have prohibited a person or business from engaging in an adult cabaret performance on public property or in a location where the performance could be viewed by a minor. She also voted no on SB 1583, which would have mandated that a level one sex offender who commits specified sexual offenses is required to register on the internet sex offender website if the offender was sentenced for a dangerous crime against children.

This most recent legislative session (2024), Austin continued her spree of opposing legislation that would have protected more Arizona children from horrific crimes committed against them. She voted no on SB 1236, which would have specified that any offender who was convicted of or adjudicated guilty except insane for sexual crimes against children, whether completed or preparatory, and was 18 years of age or older at the time of the offense, must be included on the internet sex offender website. She also opposed HB 2835, which would have established knowingly observing a nude minor for the purpose of engaging in sexual conduct for a person’s sexual gratification as a form of criminal sexual exploitation of a minor. And Austin voted no on a ballot referral (SCR 1021), which would statutorily require an adult who is convicted of a class 2 felony for any child sex trafficking offense to be sentenced to natural life imprisonment.

As with many of her fellow Democrats running for the state legislature, Austin promotes endorsements from left-leaning organizations for her campaign for the Arizona House of Representatives, including Moms Demand Action, Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona, Save Our Schools Arizona, Progressive Turnout Project, HRC in Arizona, AEA Fund for Public Education, NARAL Pro-Choice Arizona, Stonewall Democrats of Arizona, Arizona Education Association, Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Emily’s List, and Human Rights Campaign PAC.

There is one endorsement for Austin that appears to be absent from her website, from the Jane Fonda Climate PAC. Austin’s support from this PAC may be one of the most concerning for voters researching her record and determining which direction they want to see for their district. 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 New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who is one of the most progressive lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives.

The district is currently represented by two Democrats in the state House of Representatives. Austin and her fellow Democrat incumbent, Seth Blattman, ran unopposed in the recent primary election. Austin received 10,353 votes, and Blattman obtained 8,741 votes. They will face off against Republicans Mary Ann Mendoza and Kylie Barber, who also ran unopposed in the primary election. Mendoza garnered 10,429 votes, and Barber received 10,136 votes.

November’s General Election will be the second time that Mendoza has been pitted against Austin and Blattman. In 2022, Austin and Blattman defeated Mendoza and her running mate, Kathy Pearce, to assume their offices for the 2023 Arizona legislative session.

Correction: A previous version of this article listed the incorrect vote totals for the candidates. The totals have now been updated with the latest results from the Arizona Secretary of State website.

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

Socialist Healthcare Is Invading Public Schools

Socialist Healthcare Is Invading Public Schools

By Tamra Farah |

The community school model establishes school-based health clinics and is championed by entities such as the National Education Association, the American Federation of Teachers, big pharma, and Community-Based Organizations. This model is rapidly being implemented nationwide, leaving no state untouched. It increases governmental and powerful non-government organization (NGOs) control in K-12 public schools while driving a wedge between parents and children.

Concerns surrounding school-based health clinics include adopting models like the Whole School, Whole Community, and Whole Child (WSCC). These “community schools” serve as conduits for expanding governmental control over children. Of particular concern are issues related to parental consent and notification rights, especially concerning Medicaid billing and medical procedures carried out without parental knowledge or presence.

A Kentucky mom recently told her story on social media after her child saw a school dentist without her consent. The school authorized her daughter to receive anesthesia for a procedure the mother never agreed to. The family dentist later stated that her teeth were healthy and did not need the school’s dental care. That’s bad enough, but these government-run school-based health clinics are far more invasive than this.

This sounds eerily like a socialist healthcare agenda, particularly the Whole Child-Whole Community model advocated by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). This model not only undermines parental authority but introduces socialized healthcare into schools. Concerns include the potential for these programs to expand Medicaid coverage under the pretext of health equity.

School-based health clinics are backed by federal grants and championed by government organizations like the CDC. They aim to offer comprehensive primary health services directly within school campuses, encompassing physical and mental health care. The allocation of federal grants, such as the $50 million earmarked for school-based health services, and philanthropic investments of $23 million from entities like Melinda Gates’ company and Mackenzie Scott into organizations like the School-Based Health Alliance fuel apprehensions about these programs’ growing influence.

Funding for full-service Community Schools in the 2025 U.S. Budget has intensified these concerns. Such initiatives can deepen the medicalization of K-12 education and extend Medicaid coverage under the guise of health equity, potentially entangling the government further in family affairs. Recent developments include Biden’s expansion of Obamacare and the integration of mental health services into schools. Might this include a surveillance system akin to China’s social credit system?

Meanwhile, the partnership between schools and HRSA-supported health centers seeks to enhance access to comprehensive primary healthcare services for students and communities. These collaborations assert that they exist to promote health equity for families without healthcare. Yet, recent national survey data show that the uninsured rate among children (ages 0-17) fell from 6.4 percent in late 2020 to 4.5 percent in the third quarter of 2022. In addition, it appears to justify significant government spending by pulling on heartstrings.

In Arizona, efforts to address students’ mental health needs directly on school campuses are underway through partnerships with organizations like Touchstone Health Services and Valle Del Sol. These services, also funded through tax dollars, cover a spectrum of mental health concerns, from anxiety and depression to social isolation and stress. In rural communities like Graham County, telehealth options like Dialogue by DialCare have been deployed to overcome shortages of mental health professionals, granting students access to licensed counselors through virtual or telephonic counseling sessions. These developments raise the red flag of school-based counselors engaging in conversations or therapy with students without parental knowledge or consent.

Then there are school-linked services, facilitated by school nurses and School-Based Health Centers (SBHCs), which aim to improve student and family access to health and human services by providing comprehensive, accessible, and coordinated care on and off school grounds. Again, these initiatives are touted as prioritizing students’ health and well-being. That sounds like the role of parents, not schools.

Arizona Women of Action is very concerned about the impact of Community Schools on families and education. These schools prioritize health-related issues over the traditional primary focus on academics in education. We encourage the ADE to reassess contracts with Medicaid and Public Consulting Group, considering the troubling implications of their equity-based approach.

In response to the growing presence of School-Based Health Clinics meddling in family affairs, one vigilant mother from X has issued a cautionary message and actionable steps for parents to take. She advises parents to request a comprehensive list of all personnel, including representatives from Community-Based Organizations (CBOs), who have access to students on school campuses and to actively engage in posing questions to school officials to monitor the funding sources entering their children’s schools closely.

Schools do not exist to function as health clinics, and parents should scrutinize the details of any forms or school registration documents, ensuring they understand the implications of granting access to various personnel and services regarding their child.

Tamra Farah has twenty years of experience in public policy and politics, focusing on protecting individual liberty and promoting limited government. She’s served at the director level at Americans for Prosperity-Colorado, FreedomWorks, and currently with Arizona Women of Action.

Beware Those Who Intentionally Use Words To Lie

Beware Those Who Intentionally Use Words To Lie

By Dr. Thomas Patterson |

The word “liberal” was once considered a compliment. It meant fair, principled, and thoughtful. The Age of Enlightenment was birthed by “classical liberals” with their then-fantastical notions about government by consent of the governed, legal equality of all, and individually owned rights.

Later as ideologies like collectivism and class oppression gained favor among the intelligentsia, the word “liberal” was hijacked and mangled beyond recognition. It was used to describe almost anything from well-meaning do-gooders to hard-bitten class warriors, from big government socialists to tyrants who silence and ostracize their opponents, for the good of society.

With time, “liberal” lost favor. When the label became a political epithet, Leftists dropped it like a hot potato, moving on to “progressive” as their new favorite label, even though “socialist” and “Marxist” are also accurate.

Here’s the point: in the unceasing war of democratic persuasion we call politics, what you say often matters less than how you say it and the phrasing you use. Somehow, the Left always seems ahead in the game of word messaging.

Take abortion. Since the heyday of the eugenics movement, Democrats have generally been for abortion and Republicans not. The two sides were labeled pro-abortion and pro-life.

Eventually Democrats, realizing that “pro-abortion” was off-putting to many, changed their label to “pro-choice” which made the decision to terminate a pregnancy seem more like a normal consumer transaction. “Pro-life” came to mean that Republicans demanded all babies must be carried to term.

Most Americans are abortions centrists, willing to support legal abortion up to 12 weeks or so. Yet Gallup polls reveal that 60% of “pro-choice” Democrats believe abortion should be legal at any time until the moment of birth, while less than a quarter of “pro-life” Republicans believe all abortions should be prohibited. Thus the Left, by the adroit use of labels, is able to obscure the fact that their views on abortion are much further from the mainstream than are Republicans’.

“Racist” might be the most abused word in the language. During the civil rights movement, there was a broad consensus that “racism” meant the practice of judging fellow humans by their skin color rather than by the “content of their character.”

But even as race relations broadly improved, for race hustlers like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, that definition wasn’t good enough. They denied that color blindness was a positive goal in itself. They insisted instead that racial identity was our defining, inherent attribute that explained virtually all human behavior.

In support, the media and the Left subtly changed the language around racial equality. Equality before the law is a precious right bequeathed to all Americans under the Constitution. As a substitute, the Left devised a new definition for “equity,” now meaning equality of outcomes, a supposedly superior goal that assures permanent employment for the professionals in the field.

Nevertheless, the SAT, welfare reform, legitimate law enforcement, and anything smacking of merit were all deemed racist. Consequently, today the charge of “racism” has lost much of his coherence. “Playing the race card” is recognized as being bereft of real arguments for your point. Worse, if all racial discrepancies are blamed on “racism,” then the hard work of addressing the real causes of racial inequality can be deflected.

Institutions typically don’t like to admit that they use gender and racial discrimination in personnel decisions. Rather than come clean about their practices, however, they adopted the term “affirmative action” which did exactly the same thing. A majority of Americans are neither fooled nor amused.

There is obviously a world of difference between the legal immigration that has nurtured and defined America and the tsunami of lawlessness now plaguing us. Yet media commentators use “immigrant” to describe lawbreakers and lawful immigrants alike, as if only bigots believe there are real differences.

Finally, congressional bills are often given intentionally deceptive names. The Inflation Reduction Act was a recent laughable example. The bill was actually a package of green subsidies still chasing the climate chimera and other outrageous handouts that had zero possibility of reducing inflation.

Words can be powerful tools in the pursuit of truth or falsehood. Classical liberals should call out those who deliberately use words to lie.

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.