Arizona Free Enterprise Announces 2020 General Election Endorsements

Phoenix, AZ (September 3, 2020) – Today the Arizona Free Enterprise Club announced its slate of candidate endorsements for the 2020 general election cycle.    

The endorsed candidates represent individuals who align with the organization’s principles and key policy goals.  Club President Scot Mussi stated, “It is critical Arizona has leaders and policy makers who are able to articulate and stand up for free market principles and pro-growth policies.  This slate of candidates has proven they can and will.”

Proposition 207 – No

Proposition 208 – No

U.S Senate

Martha McSally

U.S Congress

Tiffany Shedd, CD 1

Brandon Martin, CD 2

Daniel Wood, CD 3

Paul Gosar, CD 4

Andy Biggs, CD 5

David Schwiekert, CD 6

Debbie Lesko, CD 8

Corporation Commission

Eric Sloan

Jim O’Connor

State Legislative Races

Judy Burges, LD 1 House                                                         

Quang Nguyen, LD 1 House                                                     

Deborah McEwen, LD 2 House

Travis Angry, LD 4 Senate

Joel John Dee, LD 4 House

Regina Cobb, LD 5 House

Leo Biasuicci, LD 5 House

Walt Blackman, LD 6 House                            

Brenda Barton, LD 6 House

David Peelman, LD 7 House

Vince Leach, LD 11 Senate

Mark Finchem, LD 11 House

Brett Roberts, LD 11 House

Warren Petersen, LD 12 Senate

Travis Grantham, LD 12 House

Jake Hoffman, LD 12 House

Sine Kerr, LD 13 Senate

Tim Dunn, LD 13 House

David Gowan, LD 14 Senate

Gail Griffin, LD 14 House

Becky Nutt, LD 14 House

Nancy Barto, LD 15 Senate

Steve Kaiser, LD 15 House

Justin Wilmeth, LD 15 House

Kelly Townsend, LD 16 House

Jacqueline Parker, LD 16 House

JD Mesnard, LD 17 Senate

Liz Harris, LD 17 House

Suzanne Sharer, LD 18 Senate

Paul Boyer, LD 20 Senate

Anthony Kern, LD 20 House

Shawnna Bolick, LD 20 House

Rick Gray, LD 21 Senate

Kevin Payne, LD 21 House

Beverly Pingerelli, LD 21 House

David Livingston, LD 22 Senate

Ben Toma, LD 22 House

Frank Carroll, LD 22 House

Michelle Ugenti-Rita, LD 23 Senate

John Kavanagh, LD 23 House

Joseph Chaplik, LD 23 House

Tyler Pace, LD 25 Senate

Rusty Bowers, LD 25 House

Tatiana Pena, LD 27 House

Jana Jackson, LD 28 House
C

Maricopa County

Proposition 449 – No

Stephen Richer, County Recorder

Allister Adel, County Attorney

Steve Chucri, Board of Supervisors District 2

Bill Gates, Board of Supervisors District 3

Gilbert

Matt Nielsen, Mayor

Scottsdale

Lisa Borowski, Mayor

Phoenix

Merissa Hamilton, Mayor

David Seibert, City Council, District 1

Prop 208 Tax Hike Punishes Small Businesses and Neglects Families in Need

In a few months the Arizona residents will have the opportunity to vote on Proposition 208, a measure funded by out of state labor unions and special interest groups to impose a $1 Billion income tax increase on small businesses and entrepreneurs in the middle of a pandemic.  Not surprisingly, employers around the state are speaking out against the measure, as Prop 208 would kill thousands of jobs, punish small business owners and destroy our fragile economic recovery.

While the economic impacts may be devastating, what may be more infuriating to Arizona families is that Prop 208 does NOTHING to assist frustrated parents and students currently dealing with Covid-19 school closures and disrupted learning schedules. The revenue generated from this 78% tax increase would come with little accountability or oversight, leaving it up to school districts and administrators to spend the money how they see fit.

Prop 208 Crafted to Benefit Unions and Provide Pay Raises to Administrators

The backers of this massive tax increase do not care about families or small businesses in Arizona.  If they did, they would not have crafted a measure full of loopholes that allow funding to be siphoned off by district administrators and away from teachers and classrooms.  The initiative redefines teacher to include non-classroom administrative staff and changes existing law so that money is no longer earmarked for teachers and classroom spending. 

Of the $1 Billion anticipated to be collected if Prop 208 passes, not one dime will support parents as they battle to educate their children, not one dime is guaranteed to support teachers, and not one dime addresses improvements needed to overcome current environmental learning challenges.

Sadly, this lack of funding accountability in Prop 208 is by design. The backers of this measure know most people support K-12 and want to see improvements in the system. They are hoping that voters will not take a closer look at the fine print.

Measure will Derail AZ’s Economic Recovery by Punishing Job Creators and Small Businesses

According to the Tax Foundation, Prop 208 would give Arizona one of the highest small business tax rates in the country.  Under Prop 208, AZ small businesses will be taxed at a top rate of 8 percent (a 78 percent increase), giving us a higher income tax rate than Nevada, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas. Employers and entrepreneurs will flee to these lower tax states, turning the Grand Canyon State into the mini-California of the Southwest.

Sadly, the small businesses who have survived so far are just starting to dig themselves out of the wreckage of the Covid-19 shutdown. It is undeniable that small businesses were hit hardest by the economic downturn, as most mom and pop shops were forced to close while big corporations (who are exempt from this tax increase) were allowed to stay open. Now just as they are seeing the light at the end of the tunnel, out-of-state labor unions and special interest groups want to hammer them with a massive tax hike at the ballot. They do not deserve this treatment.

Tone Deaf Measure Ignores Parents and Children in Desperate Need for Help

A cursory reading of Prop 208 shows that the backers of this tone-deaf initiative care little about Arizona families.  Currently the biggest crisis facing parents and students are the district-wide school closures and substandard online/distant learning conditions that have been forced upon them. They need help, yet the “solution” being offered up by the unions and special interest groups bankrolling this initiative is to dump more money into the system with no strings attached.

The only worthwhile investment in K-12 that should be considered right now is to provide direct aid to families to explore alternative educational opportunities and to help parents escape dysfunctional learning environments that are inflicting permanent damage on their kids.  Instead, Prop 208 soaks hardworking Arizona taxpayers with a massive tax hike that will likely result in nothing more than pay raises for school administrators in the middle of a pandemic.


Arizona voters should not be fooled – Prop 208 is bad for families, businesses, and our education system!

COVID-19 Provides Opportunity to Revolutionize Education

All across the country, K-12 educators and staff are holding families hostage and threatening to strike (again) if schools open up in the Fall for kids to learn in person.  They are claiming that it is not safe enough to teach, despite the fact that many districts are opening up to offer in person daycare services and are charging for the service. Parents and students that need an in-person learning option have become political pawns in the teacher union chess game to further their agenda.

If the unions and school shutdown lobby think they are winning the debate, they are sorely mistaken. With families getting their first glimpse of substandard online classroom instruction, parents are already sprinting out of their district school and opting for better alternatives.  In states such as Arizona, where school choice is popular and plentiful, parents easily have other options. 

As consumers, we are well accustomed to the luxuries of customization and flexibility.  In fact, we have come to expect it in almost every realm of goods and services.  Yet when it comes to education parents don’t realize they have a right to demand these features for their children. 

Families should have a market of options in which they consider the unique aptitude, learning style and interests of their child. Organizations and school choice advocates have been working for years to advance innovation and diversity in education and to question the top-down system of the status quo.   Additional demand from Covid-19 and opportunistic teacher unions is likely to expedite the revolution of educational options in Arizona.

Microschools

Just as it sounds, microschools are small learning environments between 8 – 10 students that blend homeschooling with an in-class community environment.  In Arizona, this concept has been popularized by the company Prenda whose goal was to create a learning environment that was self-guided and fueled by a child’s own enthusiasm for learning. Prenda created an online platform that has made its model for learning accessible to students across the state.  Even in the most isolated and economically challenged areas of the state, such as the Apache Reservation, a microschool has popped up and is serving a small number of tribal students who would have had no other option but failing district schools.

Homeschooling

Though certainly not a new concept, homeschooling is quickly gaining popularity.  Many parents who were thrust into “being the teacher” at the end of the 2020 school year have discovered they are rather good at it and are opting this year to take on the role full time.  In fact, in Maricopa County the number of families opting to homeschool their children this Fall has tripled over last year.

Pandemic Pods

Similar to microschools, parents are also forming “pandemic pods” for children in their families and neighborhoods; small groups of kids taught under either a parent or paid teacher or tutor.  This allows families to pool their resources and share the costs of a more personalized education.  Companies from Manhattan to San Francisco have popped up to facilitate the matching of families with tutors and teachers; a similar model that already exists with nanny agencies. This model has raised concerns over equity – how do children in families with limited resources and means ensure they still receive a quality education?

Right now, parents are figuring all this out on their own.  Policymakers could help. 

Expanded Empowerment Scholarship Accounts

Arizona already has a vehicle set up for “backpack funding,” a finance system for education that follows the student no matter what educational option they choose.  Currently Empowerment Scholarship Accounts are only open to certain qualifying students – such as for children with disabilities, in the bounds of schools rated a ‘D’ or ‘F’, children of military persons or tribal children. 

The legislature should expand this program for the COVID-19 pandemic.  Doing so would allow all families struggling with the difficult educational choices right now to access needed funds to tailor an education best for their child in this chaotic environment.  This could be done at a fraction of the cost of traditional district school funding.   

These models are the tip of the iceberg.  As families, educators and policymakers navigate what education looks like during the current pandemic; this is an even greater opportunity to explore how to revamp archaic school finance systems, outdated education models, and make parents expert consumers of educational options.

Arizona Corporation Commission Defies Will of the Voters With Green New Deal Proposal

While so many Arizonans are preoccupied with COVID-19 numbers, Presidential bids, a destabilized economy and an uncertain school year, the already obscure Arizona Corporation Commission has quietly released their plan to impose California-style energy mandates in Arizona.

As drafted, the proposed energy mandate will lead to skyrocketing utility bills, ban future natural gas development and generation in Arizona, provide billions in subsidies and corporate welfare for inefficient and costly energy sources and ignores the will of the voters that have already spoken and oppose a statewide energy mandate.

The Commission is intentionally pushing controversial policies during a crisis

Aside from the multiple policy concerns the Club has with this proposal, it is extremely disconcerting and unfair to the ratepayers of Arizona that the commission is even considering moving forward with such a sweeping proposal during the current pandemic.

It is hard enough during normal times for citizens to engage in the byzantine format at the corporation commission. The entire process is confusing, lacks transparency and caters to the lawyers, lobbyists and political insiders who know how to use the system to their benefit.

Now, in the middle of a pandemic, the commission is forging ahead with sweeping new energy mandates while the public is focused on other critical issues. Even if the public was fully aware of what the commission is considering, due to social distancing and other Covid-19 restrictions, it is more difficult than ever for regular people to engage in the process. On the flipside, the insiders at the commission benefit from this arrangement because it amplifies their voice and influence at the commission.

Mandate will lead to higher utility bills

No matter how proponents attempt to spin this, imposing their own version of the Green New Deal will lead to higher utility bills for customers. This is because the proposal punishes any source of energy that does not meet this “clean” definition, irrespective of cost.

As has been pointed out by Commissioner Justin Olson in the past, the current 15% mandate imposed by the Commission in 2007 led to ratepayers overpaying for their electricity by over $1 Billion Dollars. This was caused largely by forcing utilities to adopt renewable energy sources with little regard to the cost of construction or generation. It is inevitable that this new proposal will suffer the same costly result.

This proposal does not require utility providers or the commission to prioritize affordability regarding clean energy sources. Instead it imposes large scale mandates for clean sources and ignores the cost implications for ratepayers.

The good news for supporters of clean energy technology is that ratepayer affordability can be prioritized while developing some types of clean energy.  For example, industrial grade solar is now selling for as little as 3 cents/kilowatt when operating at peak levels, beating other fossil fuel competitors and nuclear. Industrial grade solar could easily be paired with other base load power sources (such as natural gas) that would be a win-win for ratepayers and supporters of clean energy.

Proposal Bans Future Natural Gas Development

It is clear from the staff proposal that the long-term goal of this clean energy mandate is to ban future fossil fuel use in Arizona, including the development and construction of natural gas power plants. Suffice to say this would be a huge mistake and very costly for ratepayers.

Natural gas has become one of the cheapest, most reliable and clean energy sources available in the United States. This is largely due to the fracking boom, which has guaranteed our energy security and independence for decades to come.

Additionally, natural gas is by far the most affordable and dependable fuel to use in conjunction with industrial grade solar. The idea that the commission is going to ban this source from future expansion is a disastrous policy decision that will damage both ratepayers and our economy.

Corporate Welfare for Rooftop Solar

Included in the energy mandate proposal is a requirement for clean energy generation to come from rooftop solar.  It is difficult to see how the inclusion of this policy carve-out as a required clean energy source as anything more than a special interest giveaway to a politically connected group at the Commission.

Lazard is a nationally recognized firm that produces an annual report showing the true cost of energy production by different sources, both subsidized and unsubsidized. Not surprisingly, the report shows that natural gas, industrial grade solar and geothermal are the most cost-effective sources of energy. The most expensive? Residential Rooftop Solar. And it’s not even close.

Given the superior energy alternatives that exist (including various types of solar energy generation), it makes no sense to force ratepayers to pay higher utility bills to subsidize more rooftop solar. The only beneficiaries from this corporate welfare are the rooftop solar companies that will be cashing in on the mandate.

Proposed Rules Ignore the Will of the Voters

In November 2018, Arizona voters soundly rejected the idea of increasing renewable energy standards. Ratepayers recognized that increasing the renewable energy mandate would result in higher utility bills and potentially destabilize the power grid. That is why 68% of Arizona voters rejected the idea.

Yet the proposed energy rules and amendments being offered by Commissioner Burns and Kennedy are almost a carbon copy of what voters opposed. It appears they don’t care what voters think and that they know better.

Fortunately, we are still in the early stages of the rulemaking process at the Corporation Commission, which means voters still have time to have their voices heard.  We cannot let the commission adopt their own version of the Green New Deal that will be disastrous for Arizona ratepayers and the economy.

Parents Should #WalkAway From Public Schools Unwilling to Educate AZ Kids

The would-be school year is fast approaching and thousands of parents across Arizona are panicking. 

How will their children learn this year?  When will they have a physical place to go?  Will parents be able to return to work?  Will they have to pay for tutors out of pocket? 

With most of the critical reopening decisions now in the hands of Superintendent Kathy Hoffman, school districts and ultimately the teachers’ union, it’s obvious now that crafting a system that works for parents and kids won’t be the top priority for the educational establishment.  Every decision from here on out will be to cater to the desires of administrators and teachers. Period.

Come August 17th, district school families will be forced to accept whatever dysfunctional Covid-schooling platform that is thrusted into their laps.  Parents of low-income families will be hit the hardest, especially those who can’t work from home. Special needs children will be hung out to dry. Kids in abusive households will continue to have no escape from a hostile environment.

And if any parent or taxpayer questions why their needs appear to be secondary to those of the educational establishment, they are immediately shouted down and told that they just want people to die.  So what if your child needs in person learning—you should just accept paying unlimited amounts in taxes to feed a substandard educational system that only adds to the chaos in your life.

Even more infuriating is the “solution” now being offered to parents that require in person schooling to address their work/life situations. Rather than open up for learning, several school districts are now offering paid childcare services

That’s right – residents already paying over half of their state taxes to education are now expected to pay to have their kids in school to not learn.   Representatives of the teachers’ union claim it is too risky to teach kids in a classroom, but apparently it is plenty safe to not teach them in a classroom. 

Parents and kids deserve better than this. 

Families were willing to extend grace at the end of the school year when districts scrambled to reformat the educational experience for online and distant learning.  The legislature passed emergency measures to ensure funding would be uninterrupted. And instead of developing a real plan that catered to families that MUST HAVE in person learning, the school districts and education lobby instead put all their time and energy into a public relations campaign to push back the start date of school to October 1st

It should be noted that there are many schoolteachers and administrators ready and willing to resume in person learning.  Afterall, through the peaks and valleys of the pandemic, essential workers have stepped up and done their jobs.  Truck workers continued to deliver critical goods, grocery store workers continued to stock shelves, and doctors and nurses continued to man hospitals and treat the unwell.  Those teachers that recognize that education is an essential service and wish to provide in person learning to our children should not be stopped by administrators and union thug bosses.

If district schools believe that there is no limit to the mistreatment of hardworking families, they are in for a rude awakening.  Most parents are very supportive of their local district school, but they will have no problem walking away from a broken K-12 system if it benefits their child.   

They may not be vocal or have active twitter accounts, but these parents are paying attention and are wide awake to this rolling disaster. They are thinking creatively about education and observing more closely than ever the best ways in which their children learn.  This will lead to rapid innovation and adoption of flexible models. 

Post-pandemic, there may very well be an explosive demand for testing new educational models, from micro-schools, “forest schools,” digital classrooms, to expanded ESAs.  An educational Renaissance is a possible and welcome outcome.