The Games We Play

You may have read with interest the many news stories about a $750 million dollar "surplus" in our state coffers. I was very interested in this, as well. To that end, I spent a good deal of time this summer exploring our budget history and the various "techniques" (read: gimmicks) used by prior legislative bodies before my time. Dismayed is not a strong enough word to describe how our Budget Reform Working Group felt when we went through page after page of accounting tricks previously used to create what you all would believe to be a balanced budget.

As you know, a balanced budget is required in Arizona, and state debt cannot exceed $350,000 by our constitutional law. News flash, folks... We have routinely ignored both through a series of accounting tricks and the creation of new words to describe what would, by anyone's estimation, be considered "debt" in a real household. I believe it is time we get real with how we handle your money down at the capitol, and anything left that we don't absolutely need should be yours to keep. I would like to reduce your personal income taxes and let you decide what to do with the money you earn, if it is truly above what is needed to provide basic government services.

You may wonder what this has to do with the surplus. Fair enough. Let's look specifically at one gimmick used last year that helped to create an appearance of a surplus. Ever heard of a "fund sweep?" This is a process by where you pay a fee for a specific purpose, to support a specific function of government, but in order to make our books look better we have to transfer or "sweep" the fees paid by you all into the general fund. Essentially, this is legal but probably not all that ethical in the long run. This practice leaves the agency or fund low, sometimes triggering fee increases to you all but always leaving the fund in a predicament of how to continue to offer the services you paid for with your fees. Ever heard of the State Highway Fund? Probably not. But, you have probably driven on roads in the state that are built and maintained with money in this fund that is partially funded through the Vehicle License Tax fund, which was robbed of $118,000,000.00 last year. That's right... The state took $118 million designated for roads, put it in the state's coffers and then announces it has a "surplus" of revenues. If you live in an area that needs road improvement, this should really hit home with you.

When we sweep funds to create a better bottom line in the general fund, we have essentially tricked the system into looking like we have a surplus when the tax revenues roll in beyond our expectations. However, we still need to pay back the "sweep" in order to hold these agencies and funds (and by extension, the taxpayers who utilize those services) harmless in the long run. I am about to disclose some raw data that may seem shocking, so turn away if government deception is nauseating to you... Our total fund sweeps, starting in 2002 through last year totaled $545,817,600.00.

Then, there are other gimmicks like the use of "Contracts of Purchase" which would be considered something like a mortgage in your real world. In government world? They are nothing more than a paper agreement and therefore we conveniently don't call them "debt"... even though they are committing future revenues to pay for goodies we just couldn't wait for. I heard a number the other day about this outstanding debt-that-we-can't-legally-call-debt and it was in the hundreds of millions (far beyond the afore-mentioned $350 thousand limit set in our constitution). So, if we are honest about that surplus, we would have to immediately reduce it by the amount we "borrowed" from around the state and by these outstanding amounts, right?

You see, the "surplus" is not extra money above what it costs to maintain your state government at current levels. Rather, it is the amount of tax revenue that came in above what we had expected when we created the budget. By use of various methods of debt (the governor likes to just skip payments or "take holidays" from them, which sounds so much nicer), we make our budget look balanced. Simply not paying your bills and then having money left over when you get your next paycheck would never be considered a "surplus" in your home, would it? No. And I don't believe you can look at our state budgeting process any differently, if you are to be intellectually honest.

True, it's not that much fun at home to get a bonus then have to spend it on credit card bills. We kind of feel the same down at the capitol. But, that is called being responsible adults. Bummer.

Your Input Sought for I-17 and Carefree Highway

From ADOT...

The Arizona Department of Transportation is seeking input from the public regarding the preferred type of traffic interchange to design and build to improve I-17 and Carefree Highway. The meeting will be held on Monday, November 14, 2005 from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. at Desert Mountain Middle School, which is located at 35959 N. 7th Ave. in Phoenix. A brief presentation will occur at 7 p.m. to discuss the types of traffic interchange improvements being considered.

Feel free to contact me if you have any questions or would like additional information.

Jennifer A. Hott
Government Relations Specialist
Arizona Department of Transportation
(602) 712-8145
jhott@azdot.gov

Representative Gorman joins Heartland Institute Advisory Board

State Representative Pamela Gorman (R-6) has accepted a position on the Legislative Advisory Board of The Heartland Institute, a 21-year-old national nonprofit, nonpartisan think tank headquartered in Chicago Illinois.

Rep. Gorman will advise Heartland on topics to address and serve as a source for the think tank’s scholars and reporters. Heartland Legislative Advisors also submit essays and news reports for Heartland publications, meet with counterparts from other states at seminars and conferences, and receive priority treatment of their research requests.

“I am honored to be able to represent the concerns of my constituents by working with The Heartland Institute and my colleagues from other states,” Rep. Gorman said. For more information about The Heartland Institute, visit its Web site at www.heartland.org.

Inches Shorter but Thousands Less...

In a recent victory for you, the taxpayer, the flags are once again flying over your state capitol and it cost you less than $20.

Governor Napolitano's administration had previously insisted that thousands of dollars be spent to replace a still-good flag pole that had been bent in a summer storm.

For months since the wind bent the pole, the Dept. of Administration has been "working on" getting it fixed. Bids came in from $11k to $28k before a bit of reason crept into the picture in the form of a freshman state legislator. State Representative Jerry Weiers (R-12), a generally all around common sense guy, thought that perhaps the community might be willing to donate time and materials as part of their patriotic duty to see that the flags would once again wave. Turns out Rep. Weiers was right. Within a couple phone calls, local companies had stepped up with everything from cranes to cages to welders so the state could hang our beautiful brand-spankin' new flags!

Napolitano's administration persisted to fight for the right to spend thousands of your dollars, in spite of the donations. Who was going to receive your money in this lucrative pole raising? You will need to pursue that information through her office. But, whoever was to take reportedly $11 thousand tax dollars to do this job for Napolitano is now left watching in wonderment as true American spirit prevailed and the flags waive without their help or their profit (for only the cost of 4 cans of silver spray paint).

Oh, there were some hang ups. All was not smooth. Turns out the pole would need to be cut (rather than bent back) to be structurally sound. So, the pole is now something like 18" shorter. But, that 18" saved the taxpayers at least $11,000.

I've included a picture of Rep. Weiers unceremoniously placing the gold ball back on the top of the flagpole. He was extended this honor for the effort he made to save taxpayer dollars, but more importantly to assure the flag still waves over your Arizona capitol. It should be noted that he did not order up a marching band, fancy banners, or a gaggle of adoring supporters. Rather, pizza was ordered for the volunteer tradesmen on the site and Rep. Weiers waited patiently for the job to be finished while chatting with those of us who curiously walked over to observe the pole repairs. A humble man and a great American, Rep. Jerry Weiers made me proud to know him once again.

Top 5 Reasons to attend the AZ Taxpayers Luncheon Nov. 5th

The awards luncheon is only two weeks away.  Join us and Senator Jon Kyl as we celebrate the best, worst, silliest and strangest in state government in 2005.
 
Top 5 Reasons to Attend the 2005 AZ Taxpayer Awards Luncheon
5.  Now that the National Review Online has mentioned our awards, we're famous.
4.  The winner of the Vladimir I. Lenin Award may actually show-up.
3.  An "arch-conservative" legislator has warned us he may get emotional.  The AZ Republic may make fun of him in the Political Insider.
2.  Because you really want to know what is the strangest legislation of 2005.
1.  Sen. Kyl will give directions to the "Bridge to Nowhere."
 
PLUS:

Rep. Pamela Gorman will be presented The Champion of the Taxpayer Award.

 
 
2005 AZ Taxpayer Awards Luncheon
Saturday, Nov. 5th  *  11:30 am to 1:30 pm
 
Keynote Speaker U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl
 
Emcee Tom Patterson, Chairman of the Goldwater Institute
 
Location: Goldwater Institute 500 East Coronado Rd, Phoenix, AZ (7th Street and McDowell, just north of I-10)
 
 
RSVP to info@aztaxpayers.org.  Make checks payable ($15 members, $20 non-members) to:

Arizona Federation of Taxpayers Association
Attn: Tom Husband, Treasurer 
5520 E. San Miguel Ave.
Paradise Valley, AZ 85253-5137
 
Elected officials are free.  Table sponsorships are available for $120 ($15 per seat for 8 seats).
 
For more information contact:
 
Chad Kirkpatrick, Chairman, Arizona Federation of Taxpayers, (602) 214-6362, chair@aztaxpayers.org  
Tom Jenney, Vice Chairman, Arizona Federation of Taxpayers, (602) 478-0146, vc@aztaxpayers.org 
 
 
 
* Thanks to the Goldwater Institute for allowing the Arizona Federation of Taxpayers to use its facilities for this event. This is not a Goldwater Institute event. Because of the Institute’s nonprofit status, AFT cannot allow any fundraising, candidate endorsements, or collection of five-dollar contributions to take place during the luncheon. 
 
This email is copyrighted by the Arizona Federation of Taxpayers.  This email (or portions thereof) may be forwarded or reproduced only if acknowledgment is given to the Arizona Federation of Taxpayers and the author.

Something smells: Gas tax funding too much pork (by Laurie Roberts)

The world has truly gone mad when I am so impressed with an article in the Arizona Republic that I feel compelled to share it here so my own readers will see it.  Someone wake me!   My only disclaimer is that I don’t blame Bush for not snapping his fingers and fixing this issue as Roberts seems to recommend.  As for the injustice of this Federal gas tax as it relates to Arizona, I couldn’t agree more.  - Pamela

The following excerpts are from an article that was printed in the Arizona Republic,  Aug. 31, 2005 titled Something smells: Gas tax funding too much pork
By Laurie Roberts

“Next time you buy gas, think of Alaska and say, ‘You're welcome.’ With every gallon you pump, you're helping to build a $223 million bridge that'll connect the tiny town of Ketchikan, Alaska, to an island where 50 people live.””Next time you wonder just why you are shelling out 18.4 cents in federal taxes for every gallon of gas you buy, just think of the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn, Mich. ($1.5 million) and the National Packard Museum in Warren, Ohio ($3 million) and Children's Museum in Indianapolis ($12.5 million). You're paying $3 million for dust control in Arkansas, $2.3 million for landscaping along the Ronald Reagan Freeway in California and $100 million for a tunnel under New York Harbor. “”It was never supposed to be this way. The Highway Trust Fund, which is fueled by the gas tax, was created in 1956 to build the interstate highway system. The 3-cent tax was supposed to expire in 1972. Instead, the gas tax is now 18.4 cents and the Highway Trust Fund is nothing more than a slush fund enabling well-connected politicians to bring home the bacon at the expense of states such as Arizona.””Better yet, how about cutting the federal gas tax to the few pennies a gallon needed to maintain the interstate system and letting states impose their own taxes for their own needs?”

To read the entire article, go to www.arizonarepublic.com or click on HERE.

ADOT Meeting on Sept. 22

From Arizona Dept. of Transportation:
Please join us to discuss the I-17/Carefree Highway traffic interchange.
Thursday, September 22, 2005 Desert Mountain Middle School 35959 N. 7th Avenue 6—8 P.M.
Input gathered at this meeting will be used to evaluate alternatives for improving the interchange.

MAG and the great head count of 2005

MAG (Maricopa Area Governments) is the organization, made up of mayors from the cities and towns in Maricopa, that largely directs or advises on planning for all areas of the county. This includes transportation planning, like the Prop 400 initiative to add a half-cent sales tax in the county to pay for the next 20 years of transportation improvement. This is the group that felt it was more of a priority to plunk down 2.3 BILLION in tax revenues for a trolley through downtown Phoenix than it was to make our trade routes safe and efficient for businesses and homeowners. Yes, this is the group that put widening of I-17 in the last phase of build-out (scheduled for 2026, folks, no kidding), essentially assuring the literal choking out of all movement of goods to and from Maricopa county to the rest of the country to the north. Bizarre sense of "logic", it seems. But, then you take a look and realize that this group didn't have representation from this area of the county. Yes, it is true. They do have ONE non-city person that represents all unincorporated Maricopa county. Unfortunately, that county supervisor is from a far off part of the county. So, we had no one "at the table" when the plan for spending all of that sales tax for transportation (prop 400).

What does this have to do with my title "great head count of 2005" anyway? Well, we have an incredible opportunity to put ourselves on the map for transportation and many other important planning issues that MAG deals with. MAG has engaged in a special census for Maricopa County to gather information about fast growth areas that were not even in existence during the last census in 2000 (think Anthem, much of Desert Hills and all of Tramonto and Foothills, etc.).

Why is this news worthy of a BLOG entry? Because they will only send these special census forms to 1 in 13 homes. That means if you throw yours away, you are discarding the voice of about 13 homes full of adult taxpayers and their 2.6 children per household. You have an incredible opportunity if you receive one of these forms. You also have an immense responsibility. Please fill it out and send it in. They claim it will only take 6 minutes to complete. It is very brief compared to the regular census.

So, please make sure all of our heads are counted in this special census! Pass on this information so your friends and neighbors will know that this census is a real thing and not some kind of marketing gimmick. We are all a little jaded these days, I realize. Expect the census to arrive in mailboxes on or around September 1st, 2005.

Once you prove you exist, I can make more waves than I already do in order to fight for more of the county tax dollars you are sending in!

When Legislators can't even get into the Lobby

Legislators make policy that government agencies must carry out. For this reason, it seems to be good practice to have the agencies and the lawmakers conferring early on about upcoming policy decisions...

But, yesterday, I witnessed a complete shut out of more than 20 legislators who attempted to sit and listen in a meeting with agencies as they aired their concerns(in this case, those agencies who deal directly with Illegal Immigration). My fellow legislators and I, from both sides of the aisle, stood outside the lobby doors for quite awhile trying to understand why the folks on the inside thought this was wise to block our entry. We finally called it a day and went home.

But, I will guarantee you that in a few months those same agencies will send in their lobbyists (paid for by your tax dollars, by the way) to come and "brief" us on what went on inside this secret shut-out meeting.

The question is, do we just tell the lobbyist to go back to the lobby? After all, we all drove 4 hours to Flagstaff on our day off to listen first hand to what the agencies feel is important on this issue and they wouldn't even let us in.

They left us on the stoop... At least we will be nice enough to extend to them the comfortable seats in the legislative lobby.

What's the big hoo-ha over the recent Supreme Court decision on Eminent Domain?

Let me tell you, in a nutshell, what the "hoo ha" is. Essentially, your whiz-bang supreme court justices have concluded that our founding fathers didn't really mean it when they guaranteed us our right to hold private property. Their decision last week announced that your property rights are limited at the point where they begin to infringe upon the desires of others who would like to take your property... As long as the tax revenues from these land-suitors is higher than your own property taxes. After all, for the collective good, those almighty tax revenues are the trump card in the question of property taxes, according to five of the justices.

Eminent Domain is a tool used by local jurisdictions (usually cities and towns) to, in its best application, clear away blighted conditions and ensure safety for the residents of the area. Unfortunately, it has sometimes been the favorite tool of over-jealous city folks who have visions of grandeur that simply do not include privately held property as currently in use. In the past, when the private property owner is threatened with exercise of the eminent domain power play, they have had some amount of success in the court system. With this new ruling, it could be very sticky for future cases, indeed.

We here in Arizona need to jump on this issue and shore up support for changes to our own state constitution. This would protect us beyond what the court has now decided about the U.S. Constitution that we all previously naively thought meant just what it said. I, for one, look forward to some spirited debate on this issue in the next session. I only hope that the proper pundits will step up to the plate and bring us a home run on this property rights issue.

ADOT announces plans for traffic signals

The Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) will begin design work this month to add traffic signals and make minor roadway improvements at the Interstate 17/Carefree Highway interchange in north Phoenix.

The project will add a temporary traffic signal system at the I-17/Carefree Highway interchange. The westbound lanes of Carefree Highway will be widened to add a dual left turn lane for drivers to enter southbound I-17. The northbound I-17 exit ramp at Carefree Highway also will be widened to better accommodate traffic turning east on Carefree Highway.

The design of the intersection improvement is expected to continue until the end of summer. Construction is scheduled to begin this fall.

Future permanent improvements at the I-17/Carefree Highway interchange are being examined as part of an engineering and environmental study that is now under way. Public meetings regarding the study are planned to occur later this summer. The study and design process for the ultimate improvements at I-17/Carefree Highway is expected to take about two years to complete. Additional funding for the permanent improvements will need to be identified in the region’s transportation program.

What is so "special" about special session?

It is funny to me that everyone seems to assume that there will be a call by the Governor to come back for a special session. I don't see the point, honestly. We put in our prescribed time (and then some) sending up a lot of good bills that the Gov gave her veto stamp. At least one of those good bills was vetoed without so much as a reading by her. How do I know this? Well, her veto explanation letter cited the Arizona Republic as her source for reason, along with the feelings of a special interest group who, by the way, also never read my bill...

Why on earth would we want to come back, upheaving work schedules and family commitments, only to create more good bills that she will then veto?

Seems to me that she should have "taken the pie when it was passing" as my grandpa used to say. There is no reason to go to special session if she is going to veto any good legislation we send up anyway.

Portable Power

There are generally two competing ideas on how centralized or localized our government should be. The "left" likes things centralized and the "right" prefers things are handled locally. If you have spent any time reading here, you may have surmised that I am to the right on most (if not all) issues. This one is no different.

When you move towards centralizing government, it means you are essentially placing more and more of the decision making power in the hands of a small group of folks at the top. When you localize government, you are diversifying and delegating that decision-making to the smaller local jurisdictions (i.e. city councils, county governments, school districts, etc.).

When the decision making is local, the average citizen has a great amount of input and the potential for impact on those decisions. Also, there are a whole lot more minds working on the problems and the solutions are locally based and specific for a community. When the decision making is centralized, there are only a handful of people making decisions who can't possibly spread themselves around to all of the citizens whose lives are affected by their decisions at the top. The biggest problem I see with this, though, is the idea that only a few folks hold the reigns for the whole population. That leaves an awful lot of power in those hands and creates a real risk for abuse and/or simply stupid ideas being thrust upon the common man.

It may seem like a good idea to let one or two key people who are known to be moral, honorable, intelligent, and magnanimous to come up with solutions to all of society's ills. After all, their decision making would be quality and therefore good. The problem is, that if you do centralize to these good folks, the power you have given them is huge and they can easily be replaced by folks who are not as good either personally or professionally. This is what I like to call "portable power." Once all of the decision-making power is bundled up to the central authority, and none of the messy local decision-making any longer encumbers the process, it becomes a real danger for the population that sits under that central authority. There could come a time when people of ill repute manage to seize that power and then all of the decisions for all of our lives will be made by these ill-equipped or ill-mannered new leaders.

So, when you hear people say that the state should be in charge of something through some new state office, be wary. One size does not fit all in Arizona's varied communities. But, more importantly, you will be at the mercy of the quality and the agenda of the person appointed to that state office. Today's appointment might be brilliant and good. The next replacement, however, could be a disaster. If the power is made portable through centralization, we would be at the mercy of the new power keepers in one swift shift of personnel. Portable power is dangerous. A bad local decision affects a few people. A bad statewide decision affects us all.

A Smooth Ride

As I traveled home one recent Sunday afternoon, I gripped for the expected tossing and jolting that I-17 north of Happy Valley Road normally offers drivers. I stayed prepared, but eventually realized that the 5 mile long series of potholes and ruts in the road were finally gone. A sense of pride mixed with relief washed over me. As silly as it sounds now, I was actually moved nearly to tears.

You see, it isn't just about a re-paved road. It is about the sacrifices made by myself, my son, my husband, all of my friends and family, and numerous volunteers that led to this smooth road. Because, the fact of the matter is that this road was not to be re-paved for two more years and I had a lot to do with that date being pushed forward. I don't say that to brag or boast. On the contrary, because if not for the efforts of the folks who worked my campaign, or donated money for it, I would not be in the legislature (and vice chair of the Transportation Committee). I owe a lot of thanks to a lot of people who were all part of building this road.

Bottom line? The voters of district six sent me to the legislature to get some things done and I was driving on one of the things they wanted done. I felt gratified for the opportunity to make a difference. I felt overcome with the sense of purpose as I realized that one person really can make a difference if they will just say "yes" and then get to work. Thank you, district 6 voters, for giving me the chance to get in there and make our little piece of the state a safer and more enjoyable place to drive.

It may not be the most important thing I will accomplish in my time there, but it certainly is a smooth ride.

Why a "no" matters, even if the budget passes

Being one of only four "no" votes on our recent budget package in the House might seem futile to many. But, what they don't see is the value to being a person of principle, and a legislator whose word means something.

When a dozen or so Conservatives gathered for an impromptu meeting of the minds and agreed that there were many things not to love about the budget proposal, it created a very powerful tool for the House leadership in their negotiations. By promising to vote "yes" only if some very stiff reforms were included with the spending (among other things) we had, in effect, given our word. This allowed the negotiators to point to us and our strength in numbers and use us as the excuse for holding spending down. I truly believe this spend-and-tax governor would have moved this budget much further to the left had our little band of fiscal conservatives not been in the picture.

We all agreed that there were five very problematic issues in the budget and set about trying to find a compromise that we could live with on those issues. Truly, we thought all of our concerns had been satisfied... Up until about 48 hours before the final vote. One by one, everything we had worked to get into the budget in terms of reforms began to disappear from later drafts. At the same time, new things were added that shocked many of us. One of our "no go" issues was the use of debt by the governor to make it appear the budget was balanced. To that end, we all thought the language allowing the governor to run up $300,000,000 in additional debt over and above the budget package had been removed. Turns out, she had somehow negotiated that little tool of hers back into the final draft. Many of us were sorely disappointed, having looked forward to voting "yes" on the previous version of the budget.

As the vote grew near, our Conservative friends began to fold to immense pressure. Only a small handful of us kept our promise and voted "no" in the end. While I don't fault others for their choices, I believe my "no" was the right vote to cast and that it mattered.

I believe it matters to keep your word. If I promised to vote "no" under certain circumstances, then I had to follow through. That is what being a person of principle is about. It is also what being a legislator who keeps her word is about. In the future, my fellow legislators will appreciate my promises because they mean something. I am hoping that my leadership team will understand this, and someday come to respect it. In the meantime, I will just have to revel in the belief that our efforts, however futile they may seem, went far in keeping this governor from spending Arizona into oblivion.

It's all in the interpretation...

Last week, a few friends went to lunch. The conversation turned to the budget and our shared concerns over some key issues that had not been addressed. Moreover, we all discovered that we were about to head into an Appropriations meeting having not had an opportunity to read the proposed amendments that we were expected to vote on. We decided to call the chairman and let him know our concerns and ask that we have time before the scheduled meeting to talk about these new amendments and the small handful of concerns. This seemed more polite than showing up and voting down amendments without giving our chairman the "heads up."

Unfortunately, this small act of preservation and respectful hesitancy was interpreted by onlookers as some sort of Conservative split from the caucus. People imagined all sorts of silly things and many folks were really offended because of their incorrect interpretation of our actions. For that I am truly saddened. We respect our Republican leadership team greatly, and we know that they are up against a tough fight with this super-liberal spending governor. To have them think we questioned them is painfully wrong.

I believe we are very close to an acceptable budget that all of us can live with and it is do in large part to the tireless efforts by our two Appropriations Chairmen and our whole leadership team in the House. All of Arizona is lucky to have such a dedicated group of people down at the House of Representatives fighting for a responsible budget that will meet the needs of Arizonans without raising taxes or spending into debt.

That's how it seems to me, but that is after all just my interpretation.

Having "text" with workmates. Where does it cross the line?

That's all. Just asking the question. I don't have the answer. I can only say that a workmate of mine has created a monster by teaching me how to use text-messaging on my cell phone. I laughed when the Verizon service rep. told me about the 1,000 text message plan that was available for my calling plan. "I'm not a teenager!" I quipped back confidently.

Then I discovered the sweet addiction that is texting. So satisfying. It can be done with your mouth full, while in a meeting, even dare I say while driving (so I'm told by one truly-masterful text partner I have...Though I'm not sure how DPS would appreciate this).

If you miss your old pen pal days, this may be just the thing for you. Unless your phone is more than a couple years old it can probably do it. Check with your calling plan first, as there are probably charges that apply.

One caveat to consider... These short text messages can be just as easily misinterpreted as regular email. Possibly, the opportunity for miscommunication is even more hazardous, as the space is so limited. Be sure to pick your words carefully, and delete messages when done. A later perusal of an innocent message under different circumstances could be a real problem.

Finally, a polite way to use a cell phone again. And, one more way the office can reach me... Wait a minute. What have I done?!

Pamela's Most Excellent Starbucks Recipe

Ok, by popular demand, here it is. I warn you, though. It is addicting. It is also relatively carb-friendly. There is enough fat and caffeine to keep you going until lunch, if that is the poor diet and lack of attention to your health that you choose.

Double Tall
Sugar-Free Vanilla
Breve
Extra Hot
Latte

If you order it in exactly that way, it will be made correctly 90% of the time even if you venture away from my "home" Starbucks location.

Enjoy.

Hillary? Heaven help us.

I heard a not-so-funny joke this morning over my ever familiar favorite latte recipe this morning... One Anthem neighbor jested that perhaps the Gov. is positioning herself to run for Senator and she will just ditch the whole Gov. thing and surprise us all. It would be much easier for her to move from Senator to Vice President (under Hillary Clinton's Administration), it was opined.

As much respect as I have for Janet's political savvy and downright rock-hard media-repelling armor, she is still a minor leaguer compared to our gal Hillary. The thought of Hillary at the helm is stuff nightmares are made of.


Yikes. Cold shiver. Somebody change the channel!

Your voices were heard!

I have to say that I have never seen a government agency respond to the "people" the way the State Land Trust Department has. As much as we owe many of our neighbors a huge "Thanks" for their well-organized efforts, we also need to give a nod to this agency. They promised they would listen, and they did. As of this morning, the map shows that most of this entire area has been left out of their conceptual plan. Daisy Mountain shows no change at all. I hope everyone who sent letters of appeal to the Commissioner will take the time to send a quick "thank you" note for this enormous reversal in their direction.

As long as that State Trust Land is held in trust, we still need to be aware that a new plan could be drawn up years down the road. It isn't "preserve land" as some have mistakenly believed. It is private property with an unknown future. While some of us around here might hope for a pristine preserved desert all around us, we should not take it for granted.

Ah, but let's not think of that today... Today, let's concentrate on our great success. Thank you to everyone who participated in helping this situation move in a positive direction!

Repaving I-17 north of Happy Valley Road

I received the following and wanted to pass it on...

Representative Gorman -

Please see the following details regarding the I-17 construction work.

- The State Transportation Board awarded the contract on March 18th.
- The 20-day "quick-start" provision in the contract does not start until the date of ADOT's letter to the contractor that follows typically a few days after the Board's contract award. In this case the letter to the contractor is dated March 21, 2004, so the 20-day provision expires on April 11, 2004.
-Paving is going to start this Friday night (4/8/04) and continue next Monday - Wednesday nights (4/11-4/13) on the Northbound right lane section from Happy Valley Road to Carefree Highway. The reason for restricting the work to just the right lane is to leave one lane open to traffic during the work. We are requiring the contract to keep one lane open at all times.

Shannon L. Wilhelmsen, Director
Communication and Community Partnerships Arizona Department of Transportation

Update on State Land Trust Issue in north part of district 6

Richard Hubbard represented the Commissioner in a standing-room-only meeting with over 1000 in attendance last week...

They confirmed that a new plan (now named the North Side State Land Study) is nearly ready, supposedly very much compliant with the Maricopa County 2020 plan.
This Plan will be distributed to the Coalition, for analysis, and
for dissemination to the rest of the community. The revised Plan
will be reviewed in the Desert Advocate, as soon as available. Deputy Commissioner
Hubbard affirmed that these are conceptual plans for a region, which
they were charged by the Growing Smarter Legislation to complete,
and should not be viewed as zoning districts. He pledged to the
County and the residents that Comm. Winkleman would not use any
super-zoning powers which might be permitted by current or future
legislation during his tenure. This had been a concern, in that
local city and county planning greatly conflicted with the State's.



Andy Kunasek, Maricopa County Supervisor for this area, reaffirmed
that he will do all possible to ensure that the residents have voice
in the planning for this area, which Commissioner Winkleman has
acknowledged as the appropriate source once the Urban Land Planning
Oversight Committee submits the revised plan to the Commissioner.
All District 6 & 7 elected state officials also attended the meeting.


The community must remain vigilant about all
interactions of State Land with new development on a continuing
basis, and report same to the Coalition. The availability of open
public comment on any proposed plan has been the critical link
requested by the coalition. Your input and view is important.


The next public meeting that will have Coalition representation is the State Land
Department's Urban Land Planning Oversight Committee Meeting that
will be held on
April 21st
1 PM
1616 West Adams Street
(downtown)Phoenix
There is free parking across Adams at Wesley Bolin Plaza, or behind the building. The back parking lot is easiest to access via 17th Avenue. If you are not familiar with downtown, please remember that this is the capital mall area where Washington travels only westbound and ends in a "Y" at Wesley Bolin Plaza. You will need to choose the north side of the "Y" which will take you directly onto Adams. The building is just at the top of the "Y" on the right.

While you are welcome to attend and comment, given the time of this
meeting and the location, it is not one requiring broad public
attendance.

The inherent vice of capitalism

Winston Churchill: "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."

Our Budget... Vetoed by Napolitano. A hasty move?

Below is a summary of the present situation with our state's budget as provided by the Arizona GOP in a recent email...

The Arizona Legislature’s approved budget plan protects children, promotes families and offers compassion without jeopardizing our children’s financial future. However, the Governor’s proposal mortgages our future by forcing today’s children to pay for her short-sighted excesses. On Monday Governor Napolitano only took 15 minutes to veto a good budget sent to her by our hard working Republican Legislators at the state Capitol. Don’t let Napolitano play games with the future of our state. Republican Legislators have crafted a fiscally responsible budget that invests in our state’s future while protecting Arizona’s Children.

The Legislature’s Sensible Budget
vs.
The Governor’s Tax-and-Spend Plan

Tax Policy
The people’s Legislature recognizes the state’s money comes from hard-working Arizonans who deserve to keep as much of their paycheck as possible while still funding vital services.

The Legislature’s Sensible Budget
The Legislature eliminates the marriage penalty when giving to student tuition organizations, conforms the state’s code to the IRS, which allows Arizonans to write off tsunami-related donations on their 2004 tax returns and reduces the inequity businesses face on property tax without shifting the burden to homeowners. The governor nullifies these and other features of a massive tax relief package with her hasty blanket veto.

The Governor’s Plan
The governor increases taxes by vetoing the IRS conformity bill. With that veto, Arizonans will be paying higher state taxes. She calls for targeted and largely cosmetic business tax cuts that do not provide overall relief for a wide range of families and businesses.

Welfare Reform
Arizona taxpayers spend billions of dollars to provide aid for the poor, including day care subsidies for working parents, health care for the poor and cash assistance. We continue and in fact expand our health care programs but put in place sensible reforms.

The Legislature’s Sensible Budget
The Legislature recognizes the need to give a hand up to some of our citizens. By adding sensible reforms, we ensure welfare does not become a lifestyle. For instance, we implement a cap of five children per family for the day care subsidy and a five-year family limit. The governor nullifies these and other meaningful reforms with her hasty blanket veto.

The Governor’s Plan
The Governor increases the welfare rolls even when there is no need. Her increased spending eliminates a waiting list for the day care subsidy program despite the fact no such list exists. The Governor asks for an additional $28 million for new CPS caseworkers despite gross failures and wasteful spending. Two years of increased funding this woefully managed executive agency has produced no improvements for the protection of children. However, the agency has continued full pay and reassignment to desk duty for convicted felons who could not obtain clearance to work directly with children.

Education
Nothing is more important than the good education of our children. The Legislature makes it our top priority.

The Legislature’s Sensible Budget
The Legislature adds $175 million to K-12 education, including substantial dollars intended to go directly to retain our experienced teachers. The Legislature also adds $70 million for normal building maintenance to ensure our new schools remain in use for a new generation of Arizona schoolchildren. The Legislature invests $25 million more into K-12 education than proposed by the governor. The governor nullifies these and other important education improvements with her hasty blanket veto.

The Governor’s Plan
The Governor asks for less money for our schoolchildren. She denies teachers a pay raise and adds new money for her pet project, full-day kindergarten. The governor’s substantially duplicative program comes despite the fact that many school districts tax their property owners or use federal dollars to implement the full-day kindergarten.

Fiscal Responsibility
For the last several years, we have had to borrow and use smoke and mirrors to balance our books. We put a halt to those practices. We will not mortgage our children’s future.

The Legislature’s Sensible Budget
The Legislature ends the vicious and costly cycle of borrowing to pay for new schools. Building new schools for our children has become an annual expense, much like any operating expense. And government should avoid borrowing to cover day-to-day costs. By paying cash, the state saves an immediate $45 million. The Legislature also pays cash to settle a taxpayer lawsuit. The Legislature does not rely on gimmicks or smoke and mirrors to give Arizonans a balanced budget. The governor nullifies these and other fiscally prudent measures with her hasty blanket veto.

The Governor’s Plan
The Governor wants to sell a state building to settle the taxpayer lawsuit while also borrowing $300 million to pay for new schools. Her plan creates the specter of a tax increase to cover the mounting debt and expansion of welfare in our state. She fails to find efficiency savings promised in her 2002 campaign that would eliminate the need for school construction borrowing.

Say "NO" to a balanced budget? What?!

I sat in disbelief as I watched a bill go down that would have made it illegal for the legislature to pass an unbalanced budget. The bill was actually not a normal bill, it was a referendum. This means that if successful in the house and senate, then it would be up to the voters to decide at the next election if they wanted to approve this new law. And, this bill had lost before and was up for a reconsideration. So, to lose a second time meant it was deep dead. Gone until next year at the earliest.

The reason this bill was being reconsidered was because many people had "said" they voted against it the first time around out of confusion. They said they thought it was TABOR (Taxpayers Bill of Rights), which is arguably one of the most aggressive pieces of fiscally conservative legislation out there these days. In actuality, though, this bill was all of the really obviously good things about TABOR without all of the "out there" super conservative stuff. So, someone made a motion to hear it again. Naturally, everyone expected it to pass the second time now that everyone understood that this was more of a "TABOR-lite" (my own pet term for it).

In other words, this was a very reasonable piece of legislation that the voters should have had a chance to vote on. I was shocked to see that we couldn't find 31 Republicans willing to even give the voters the chance to insist we give them a balanced budget. What is so bad about letting the voters choose to have a balanced budget?! Shocking. Discouraging. Sad. Borderline disgusting, to be honest.

Vindicated

In a stroke of his official pen, Gene Lemon has vindicated me and finally brought a much-awaited end to the vicious accusations and outlandish statements by Clancy Jayne. Below are Mr. Lemon's words, in a letter dated March 4th, regarding the various complaints filed by my former opponent (your former representative). These complaints were filed against me after he got a good old fashioned whoopin' at the polls last September:

Dear Ms. Gorman:

Thank you for your thorough and timely response to the Commission's Order Requiring Compliance issued February 10, 2005, and for agreeing, within the time allowed, to amend your campaign finance reports to achieve full compliance with the requirements of A.R.S. 16-948 (C).

Your response enables me to find:
*All expenditures of campaign funds by Gorman 20054 were for direct campaign purposes in compliance with Commission rules.

*The amendments to your campaign finance reports satisfy the requirements of A.R.S 16-948 (C).

*The amendments to your campaign finance reports satisfy the requirements of A.A.C. R2-20-109(A)

*No violation of the provisions of A.R.S. 16-948 (C) pertaining to petty cash was committed by Gorman 2004.

*No illegal contribution was received by Gorman 2004 in connection with its transactions involving the procurement and mailing of four-color campaign literature in the campaign.

Accordingly, I will recommend that the proceedings in the captioned matters be terminated, that the matters be closed an that a final order to those effects be entered.

Sincerely,
L. Gene Lemon
External Investigative Consultant

COW

COW, or Committee Of the Whole, is an interesting part of the lawmaking process in the House. This is the one time when all 60 of us, both Republican and Democrat alike, sit in the same room to discuss every bill on the calendar. With good parliamentary procedure, it remains surprisingly tame...So far. But, I would imagine that if there are going to be fireworks this session, this is where they will be seen. You are welcome to come observe from the gallery, if that sounds like a good way to spend the afternoon. It is all open meetings and if you have the stamina to watch for 6 hours, you will eventually hear all of the day's calendars. To find out when we have our next COW, just call in and talk to my assistant "Phil" and ask. I would love to have a blog-pal as a guest. #602-926-4002.

Heads up on Freeway restrictions in our district this weekend

Westbound Loop 101 (Agua Fria Freeway) will be narrowed to one lane between 27th and 51st avenues from 9 p.m. Friday to 5 a.m. Monday (Feb. 28) while crews pour concrete pavement as part of the project to add a new merge lane to the freeway. Drivers should consider exiting the westbound Loop 101 ahead of the restriction and using the westbound frontage road before re-entering the freeway at 51st Avenue.

Bills of note in the system now.

Today we heard much discussion on the "Rights of Conscience" bill, sponsored by Representative Doug Quelland (R) from district ten. This bill would allow pharmacists and health care providers to refuse to participate in abortions or in the dispensing of life-taking drugs like the morning-after pill, as it is known. This bill does not stop anyone from getting these products and services. Rather, it would simply allow anyone who believes an unborn child to be a human life to refuse to end that life through their own efforts.

It has nothing to do with religion, but a person's "conscience" as it applies to the decision to end a human life (assumedly against the will of the human whose life is in question).

Your word is all you have, in the end.

Today in the House, I watched as one member lost faith in the word of another. It was uncomfortable for everyone, and it certainly was not fun to witness.

Here in this lawmaking body, we depend upon people to keep their word. Based on that, we make decisions and negotiate solutions with others. When someone chooses to break their word (voting the opposite direction from their commitment to another member), the ramifications can be far reaching. If other members identify someone as a flip-flop voter, it can really impact how affective that person will be in moving their own bills through the system.

Trust is so important anywhere, but especially here. Here, your word is all you have, in the end.

Making a Difference

Today we heard a variety of bills in our Appropriations committee. It was refreshing to hear two bills that had already been amended to remove tax increases before we were asked to vote on them in our committee. In some small way, I sensed that there is a mood emerging where it is evident that bills will have trouble making it through if they are asking for tax increases. That is great for all of us who pay those taxes!

I think people would be surprised to hear all of the different ways people, who are total strangers to you, approach us and ask us for access to your billfold. Sometimes it is quite creative, and ALWAYS is accompanied by a "sky is falling" warning of what will happen if we don't crack open your wallet just a little further.

The bizarre mentality of "the-press-lies-about-me-but-tells-the-truth-about-everyone-else"

Someone very astute recently pointed out a common, yet bizarre, mindset that most of us seem to have. In this mindset, we read a newspaper article written about ourselves and realize that the reporter got a lot of things wrong. We are angered over their lack of attention to the facts at hand, and their seemingly endless supply of "manufactured" truths. We hope everyone who reads the story about us is "smart enough" to realize it for what it is... It's poor reporting and sometimes downright lies. "They'll print anything to sell papers!" we proclaim to anyone who will hear.

Then, we promptly turn to the next article and drink in all of the "accurate" information about other people. We are shocked by what the others have done, which is evidenced by the very fact that it is written in the paper. It must be true, right? After all, it is written in the paper.

Where have all the journalists gone?

Did you know that a few days ago, "Jane Roe" (of Roe v. Wade fame) petitioned the Supreme Court, formally asking to have the decision reversed or for Roe v. Wade to be reopened on its merits?

Believe it. On January 14, Norma McCorvey, the woman formerly known as Jane Roe, petitioned for a Writ of Certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States.

This, possibly the most significant court case of our time, is not news? What?!

C'mon press! *snap snap* Try to stay with us here...

read more on this from Congressman Trent Franks at:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/GuestColumns/printFranks20050219.shtml

A lesson in the process

Today was an interesting lesson in the process for me. As we discussed the list of potential Democratic amendments to the Marriage Amendment "postcard" to Washington, a few wonderful new tricks were observed. First of all, you can use unrelated amendments to make your point in a rather emotional appeal, even if you know your amendment is doomed to fail anyway. It's a great way to make a point in public without the messy business of creating a bill and having it heard in committees first. Genius! Secondly, it is possible to grandstand with your ideas if you are careful to first fill the gallery with like-minded onlookers that will applaud on cue to your thoughtful remarks. Brilliant! Lastly, if you want to be sure to get a good soundbite on the radio, you must rehearse the lines of your floor speech. Artful. I definitely learned something today. I learned that as the majority, we have overlooked the power of parliamentary procedure, and that is a shame. Here's to hoping we do better.

If it walks like a duck...

Perhaps I'm too "green" and still hindered by the reality from which I emerged to enter the political arena... I say this because today I was told by a man, who I otherwise respect, that it isn't "really" a tax increase if we are simply raising the amount of taxes that a county can choose to impose. Even though previous legislators have often ducked their accountability for raising revenues by creating new or increased taxing authorities in lower jurisdictions, I am not of like mind.

To me, if I were to vote to give permission to raise taxes to another lower jurisdiction, knowing full well that the taxing jurisdiction came to us for that permission specifically so they COULD raise taxes, then I would be voting for a tax increase. Indirectly, yes. But, I think it is intellectually dishonest to claim that this is not a vote for a tax increase... Just because some other poor fool at the local level is going to take the heat for the increase, doesn't mean we can walk away clean if we vote to permit it.

The voters told us they didn't want tax increases, and even passed prop 108 to require us to get 2/3 of the vote in order to do so. I feel I owe the voters my no vote on allowing a county to raise their taxes, even if my coworkers do not agree.

How long can you hold your breath?

For Arizona children, this is not just a childhood game. Rather, they are faced (sometimes daily) with frightening episodes of gasping to get air. I'm told that these asthma attacks are like drowning on dry land. You breath in, but no air gets to your desperately starving cells. For these innocent kids, the welcome "puff puff" of their trusty inhaler is all that gives them respite from an episode and confidence in their ability to keep up with daily activities. Sadly, some schools in the state have forbidden their students from keeping their inhalers with them while on campus or while at school-sponsored events. For kids that walk or bike to school, this prevents them from even having it in their backpacks for fear of expulsion if caught with the "contraband" inhaler. While I appreciate the spirit of the "Zero Tolerance" policies our school districts have adopted, I think we all agree this has gone too far.

And, when I say "we all agree" I truly mean that. The entire body of the Arizona House of Representatives voted to give school kids permission to carry their inhalers. I sponsored this bill, and many talented people helped me to tweak the language in order to build a better law that keeps kids safe and allows the schools to know who has inhalers on campus. Now the bill is on to the senate and will be heard in the Education Committee, hopefully sometime soon. If the Governor signs the bill into law, it will be in effect for the 2005-2006 school year.

Contact Me

Should anyone wish to contact me directly, I am very easy to find.  Talk to you soon!

 

Pamela Gorman

State Representative, AZ House of Representatives

pgorman@azleg.state.az.us

www.PamelaGorman.com

602-926-4002

 

 

Take a Picture because Photo radar may be changing...

Last week, the Transportation Committee forwarded some reform for people caught with a heavy lead foot. The committee approved Rep. Andy Biggs’ HB2119 to turn the tickets issued to speeders caught by photo radar into civil penalties while removing the points assessed on a driver’s record. (Those points translate into higher insurance premiums). HB2119 makes it a civil fine if the ticket is paid with 21 days. Another bright spot is cities get their money from the fines without having to hire process servers to find scofflaws. The positive effects of photo radar on safety are largely attributed to the "scare factor" or the fact that the sign stating "radar in use" scares people into slowing down. Those effects will still be realized, helping to reduce traffic accidents.

A bumper crop!

This is a record year – though, it’s a dubious record. House members dropped 800 bills and resolutions into the hopper this first session of the 47th Legislature. And usually the second session is the one jam-packed with new ideas.

Envy

Today in church, my pastor talked about envy and how it causes people to do and say and think horrible things. I thought about this in reference to the people out there who make my time here in office, shall we say, less than pleasant. If you lose a political race, I guess you would have a very large case of envy. Not that this justifies the horrid behavior and false accusations, but it certainly helps me to understand that this has nothing to do with me and is not going to stop because of anything I say or do.

Hmmmm. So, is it better to envy or be envied? I've decided it is better to be envied (and therefore persecuted unfairly) than to give up the opportunity to serve the good people of district 6. I will continue to fight for responsible government because that is what you sent me here to do. If I wasn't in a position to affect our state government, I would not be envied. I choose to be envied... I hope you, too, will decide to be the best you can be, do the most you can do, make the biggest impact for good you can make, and let others envy (and hate) you for it, too!

The Irony

It is frustrating to be a person who highly values her integrity, and then has it questioned at every turn by one who has none. Ah, the irony.

Welcome to the Blog...

I am State Representative Pamela Gorman, and you are now on a blogging adventure with me. Thank you for joining me. If you are here, then you must be incredibly curious about your state government. That is the first step toward being part of the solution here in Arizona... Just an ounce of curiosity will take you far in state politics. Welcome. :)