Donor Harassment Initiative Looking to Qualify for 2020 Ballot

After failing last year to qualify a measure forcing disclosure of contributions to non-profit organizations and eliminating donor privacy, Terry Goddard is back peddling a revised iteration of “Outlaw Dirty Money.”  This time dubbed “The Voters Right to Know Amendment,” the proposal would change the Arizona Constitution to require the disclosure of the “original source” of all major contributions used to “influence Arizona elections.”

Major contributions are defined as $5,000 or more in a single campaign, $20,000 for statewide campaigns or $10,000 for all other campaigns in an election cycle.

The issue is easy to speak to on a superficial level – convincing voters they have “a right” to know who is spending in elections sounds appealing to people on the left and the right of the political spectrum.  However, lying just below the surface are insidious motivations and consequences.

Coerced disclosure Encourages Government Corruption

Predating the drumbeat for private non-profits to publicly out the individuals who support them, there has existed extensive campaign finance laws aimed to disclose the financial support candidates receive who are running for public office.  Money candidates directly receive is treated differently than organizations because elected officials who are a part of the government have a duty to reveal potential financial conflicts of interest.  More importantly, laws already exist against corruption such as quid pro quos, bribes, and financial fraud.  These are the appropriate laws that keep politicians honest.  These are the laws that effectively weeded out 7 Arizona lawmakers in the infamous 1991 AZSCAM scandal.

In contrast, individuals freely and privately associating with organizations that share their common beliefs and want to share their views with voters is not corruption. It is free speech.

And protecting this right is important given the track record of harassment and intimidation directed toward individuals attempting to exercise their 1st amendment rights.  This isn’t a theoretical argument; there are several documented cases of private citizens being targeted for supporting a cause or organization.  One such example occurred 61 years ago under National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) vs the State of Alabama.  In this case the state was arguing they had “a right” to the membership list of the NAACP to determine if the organization was doing business in the state.  In the tumultuous throws of segregation, the true purpose was for the government to create an “enemies list” of financial contributors by which they could exert their coercive power and intimidate members into abandoning the cause.

More recently, in 2015 the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled in favor of protecting every citizens’ First Amendment right by determining a three year investigation by the state into conservative groups was illegal.  In the commonly dubbed “John Doe” investigation, government regulators gnashing for names of their political enemies actually ambushed non-profit leaders in the early dawn hours at their homes, crashing into rooms where children slept in an effort to find donor lists.

This is why transparency is only a virtue when applied to government and privacy is a virtue when applied to citizens.  That’s why public record laws only apply to government and not private citizens.  Though the proponents of Goddard’s proposal strive to confuse voters with seedy sounding language like “dark money,” they cannot point to a single instance where knowing which individuals support what political speech led to the uncovering of a violation of law or “corruption”. HOWEVER, there are masses of real-life examples of similar disclosure laws being used to attack, intimidate, and compel private citizens. 

Goddard’s Initiative Doesn’t Know What Laundering Means

Lastly, the “Voters Right to Know Amendment” falsely equivocates laundering with the innocent and lawful act of individuals giving money to non-profits and organizations with which they align.  As an attorney, Goddard should know money laundering (which rightfully so is already a crime), involves concealing money obtained illegally by transferring it through legitimate businesses. This is an attempt by Goddard to implicate honest individuals with a constitutional right to spend their money however they like without the scrutiny of government.  Imagining every private citizen donor as a potential criminal with nefarious intentions is just wrong.  Not to mention criminalizing anonymous speech is a perversion of justice – there are no victims in non-disclosure– only victims when the right to privacy is violated.

At the end of the day, initiative’s like Goddard’s are a dangerous threat to every citizen’s right to privacy, free speech and association.  It concentrates more power into the hands of the government and erodes some of our most basic democratic principles.  Proponents have flimsy intellectual arguments and catchy rhetoric – but behind them is government target list and a loaded gun.  Hopefully, their third attempt to fool voters is equally unsuccessful. 

Phoenix City Council Considers Forcing Ridesharers to Subsidize Sky Harbor Train

The City of Phoenix is addicted to wasting millions of dollars on antiquated train systems.  So much so that they are constantly looking for more people to subsidize the ever-growing and inevitable rising costs.

Their new target?  Phoenix Sky Harbor patrons who Uber or Lyft to the airport.

Even though ridesharers have absolutely no need to take the Sky Train at Sky Harbor, that hasn’t stopped city officials from implementing a 200 percent increase on the current $2.66 fee for them to pick up and drop off passengers.

Under the current proposal the Phoenix Council voted on October 16th, passengers would see a $10 round trip cost increase by 2024, making Phoenix one of the costliest airports in the country for residents to rideshare.

A fee to cover the rideshare companies’ impact on roads and curbs is understandable.  However, forcing their customers to subsidize a train they don’t use is little more than social engineering.  Currently, many people find it more affordable to uber to the airport than to park their car.  The real goal of this policy: force people to use the train by making the alternative less economically desirable.  Afterall, if the issue was equity as argued by proponents, elected leaders would require a fee on users of the Sky Train not the ridesharersAdditionally, rideshare patrons will get a discount off their fee if they use the Sky Train to the 44th St Station.

Just like downtown Phoenix light rail, city officials are constantly looking for creative ways to force people onto their trains to make the millions they waste on a system people barely use look less like a boondoggle.

California Labor Groups File AZ Ballot Initiative to Unionize Hospital Workers

After the Arizona Free Enterprise Club successfully advocated for initiative reform to crack down on circulator fraud and abuse, groups have been manically organizing to file their ballot initiatives before the new law took effect August 27th 2019.

Just eking in on August 26th was an initiative funded by California big-union Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers (SEIU-UHW).   SEIU is best known in Arizona for picketing at hospitals as well as their failed attempt to qualify a ballot initiative in 2016 to cap hospital executives’ pay.  The political group formed to push the effort is “Healthcare Rising Arizona” which is perhaps fitting considering the inevitable rising costs the passage of this initiative would cause.

The unions plan to sell the measure to voters by codifying in Arizona statute provisions of Obamacare that prohibit discrimination based upon pre-existing conditions.  Additionally, it would address ‘surprise billing’ by prohibiting hospitals and ambulance services from charging an out-of-network patient above what their in-network cost sharing is, and mandates specified reimbursement rates for insurers to pay facilities, ambulances and providers.

The reality is that protections for pre-existing conditions and ‘surprise billing’ already exist in Arizona.  In fact, two years ago Arizona lawmakers passed legislation to create a dispute process for consumers who receive a surprise bill. 

So why would a California labor union spend millions to run a campaign in Arizona to pass laws that already exist?

The answer is the immediate 5 percent pay raise for all direct care hospital workers (including nurses, janitorial staff and food prep staff) that would go into effect upon passage.  Although the proponents admit these would be substantial costs that would likely be passed onto patients, it is a convenient way to set the stage to put Big Union bosses in charge of wages and benefits negotiations.  Furthermore, no data suggests that hospital workers are under paid; especially in Arizona where cost of living is affordable.

Finally, the initiative would increase regulatory burdens on private hospitals and require the Arizona Department of Health Services to levy major fines for falling short.  Increased red tape means higher administrative costs getting passed on to the consumer.

If Americans and especially Arizonans have learned anything from Obamacare it is that government intrusion into healthcare complicates the system, increases costs, and decreases choice. 

Although there is still plenty of time for proponents to collect signatures for the 2020 ballot, they won’t have to comply with new commonsense requirements to qualify circulators and ensure they’re not felons.  It is likely therefore that bad actors and paid union members will flood the streets for the 237,000 required signatures.  Hopefully voters will have a healthy sense of skepticism when approached with another big-government solution to their healthcare.

Ballot Measure Looking to Bring Back Ballot Harvesting to Arizona

Frustrated by efforts to reduce election fraud and initiative abuse, a coalition led by a petition gathering firm and several Democrat operatives have decided to run an initiative. Dubbed the “Democracy and Accountability Act,” their proposed ballot measure would roll back several key election reforms, including the current prohibition on ballot harvesting in Arizona.

For those not familiar with ballot harvesting, this is a tactic used by labor unions and paid canvassers to go door to door and collect early ballots from voters. Often, political operations will go to apartment complexes or other high-density areas and ‘harvest’ ballots in key races, where a few votes might make a difference.

Ballot harvesting is incredibly intrusive and runs counter to the American tradition of a secret ballot. Unlike polling locations on election day where advocates are required to stay 75 feet from the voting stations to give voters privacy, activists and other hired guns can directly engage and pressure citizens while they are voting at their homes. 

It also is an invitation for voter fraud, especially given the fact that Arizona is predominantly an early voter state. Ballot harvesting pressure tactics have been documented, and both parties have been found to abuse the process. Given the opportunity for mischief, Arizona wisely banned the practice in 2016 and limited early ballot returns to immediate family members.

There is no reason to bring ballot harvesting back, unless the goal is to manipulate the election process and to make money for political operatives and unions that run these operations.

It also explains why the initiative includes several changes to the registration requirements for paid petition circulators as well. For years, petition firms have opposed any reforms that would prevent initiative fraud and abuse, primarily because it holds paid circulators accountable for wrongdoing (and by extension, the petition firms that hire them).

That’s bad for business, so their solution was to remove the requirement that the Secretary of State review the paid circulator registration forms for accuracy and to eliminate all penalties for skipping town and ignoring lawfully issued subpoenas during signature challenges.

The backers of this measure likely know that bringing back ballot harvesting and encouraging paid circulator registration fraud will not be popular with voters. In order to avoid this uncomfortable discussion, they included additional language that would crack down on potential conflicts of interest by politicians at the legislature. 

Though we appreciate the concern petition firms have about corruption and conflicts of interest at the legislature, it rings rather hollow when they are simultaneously looking to increase corruption (and profit) at the ballot box.

It is too early to say whether this measure will have enough money and support to qualify for the ballot. Even if it does, we are confident that voters won’t have too much trouble seeing through this obvious attempt to undermine the integrity of Arizona’s electoral process.

Proposal to Increase Property and Sales Taxes Would Derail Arizona’s Economic Boom

Arizona’s economy has been on fire.  In just the last year the Grand Canyon state has created 75,000 jobs and Maricopa county leads the nation in population growth.

The state is more productive than ever too.  Arizona now ranks third fastest growing GDP in the country; outpacing heavy weights such as California, Florida and Texas.  Arizonans are enjoying a better standard of living as well with an over $61,000 median household income. 

This tremendous boom is a direct result of lawmaker’s decisions to keep tax burdens low and to create an environment where businesses can thrive. 

And yet the tax-and-spend lobby wants to squander this prosperity by reversing the very policies that got us here.

A group led by the Helios Foundation has unveiled a proposed measure that would impose a $1 Billion dollar property tax hike AND a $500 million dollar sales tax increase. It would be by far the largest property tax increase in Arizona history and be extremely punitive toward job creators in the state.

And just like its “Invest in Ed” predecessor, this tax hike is entirely unnecessary.  Due to pro-growth polices and historic federal tax reform, Arizona has enjoyed record tax revenues and budget surpluses the last two fiscal years.

Most of this surplus has been put toward education. In the last 18 months the legislature and Governor Ducey have pumped nearly $1.5 Billion in new spending into K-12 education, most of which has gone toward the ‘20by2020’ teacher pay plan, the continued restoration of district additional assistance, new school construction and results-based funding.  And even after all that spending there was enough left over to structurally balance the budget and leave $1 Billion in the rainy-day fund. 

Not surprisingly, none of this additional K-12 funding has satisfied the education spending lobby, which is why we are back at square one talking about another tax hike.  It doesn’t seem to matter that Arizona has been making tremendous gains in student performance over the last decade or that how you spend the money is far more important than how much is being spent.

Arizona is on the right path and changing course now would be a mistake.  That’s why taxpayers should be wary of proponents peddling major tax hikes claiming our schools are in shambles.  Instead, we should continue to grow and diversify our economy, invest in school choices that increase competition and improve educational outcomes, and demand higher standards.  Afterall, you get far more juice out of the economy by growing it – not by squeezing it. 

Pro-Light Rail Comedian Beclowns Himself in Attempt to Downplay Cost of South Phoenix Rail Project

It has been interesting to watch supporters of light rail try to explain away its exploding cost and how projects such as the South Phoenix extension have turned into reckless boondoggles for taxpayers.

As has been reported by multiple news outlets, the cost for South Phoenix rail extension has tripled in three years to $1.35 Billion dollars. At $245 million per mile it is now one of the most expensive rail projects in the country. And with the Federal Government reducing their funding share to 39%, Phoenix taxpayers are now on the hook for an additional $400 million in cost overruns.

Now a little-known comedian named Hasan Minhaj has decided to enter the fray, putting out a short video attempting to demonstrate why light rail isn’t such a bad deal after all. In doing so he inadvertently provided more evidence on the absurd cost of the South Phoenix rail project and why other transit options (such as expanded bus, dial-a-ride, ridesharing, etc.) would make much more sense.

His first critique is that opponents to light rail have ignored their economic development benefits for the community. This is simply not true.

Maybe during his extensive research on the issue Mr. Minhaj missed the fact that our organization already looked into Valley Metro’s $11 Billion-dollar economic development claim and discovered that it was a sham. Virtually every project on their list was either government funded/subsidized or had nothing to do with light rail. Unless, that is, Mr. Minhaj wants to argue that QuikTrip gas stations, car washes, the Phoenix Police forensic lab, the Maricopa County Sheriff Office and a Tesla Auto Dealership were built because of light rail.

He then complains that our organization and others have messed up by overstating the actual costs of light rail. Using an uncited, non-existent transit “industry standard,” Mr. Minhaj declares that the true cost for the South Phoenix project is only $14 per rider. He arrives at this figure by calculating the number of projected boardings over the next 30 years (105 million) and divides that into the cost of the project.

One small problem: he confuses riders with ridership. These are not all unique individuals, unless Mr. Minhaj believes that the entire population of Arizona, California, Texas, Virginia and Florida all plan to visit South Phoenix and ride the light rail. Perhaps for educational reasons people will flock to the area to see how many small businesses light rail has bankrupted, but we doubt it.

Now Mr. Minhaj is correct that the projected daily boardings for the South Phoenix extension is 9,600. It is a figure that some light rail opponents have used to determine that it would be cheaper to buy every rider a Tesla than expand light rail ($1.35Billion ÷ 9,600 riders =$140,000). In reality they were being way too forgiving—since actual daily unique riders will be half that amount (around 5,000), the true cost is closer to $280,000 per rider. Forget Teslas, it would be cheaper to buy every rider a condo than build the South Phoenix extension.

This doesn’t mean that the $14-dollar figure Mr. Minhaj arrives at isn’t significant. Thanks to him, taxpayers now know that they will be paying at least $14 to move someone up to 5 miles in one direction on the light rail ($2.80 per mile).  Given that the average 5-mile uber/lyft ride is around $10, it would be cheaper to issue 100 million rideshare vouchers over the next 30 years than it is to build the South Phoenix project.

We give Hasan Minhaj credit for trying to inject some humor into the light rail debate. It is too bad that he assumes that opposition to costly light rail is only because of some deep seeded irrational hostility to transit or involves an evil Koch brother hiding behind every bush.

Light rail is simply too costly and will end up consuming the city’s transportation budget if expansion is not stopped. That doesn’t just mean canceled road repairs, but reduced bus and dial-a-ride service as well. There are better options available, and we intend to continue to advocate for transportation solutions that benefit all residents, not just the 1% of the population that use light rail.