by admin | Jan 19, 2017 | News and Updates
The Club recently shed light on the effort in Pinal County to ask voters to approve an additional half-cent transportation tax increase on top of the current transit tax. Following a series of State Auditor General reports, the existing tax—which dates back to the late 80’s—has a long recorded history of misuse and misallocation of funds. Transportation dollars have been used to give Christmas bonuses to city employees and the majority of the dollars are being allocated to the politically powerful municipalities in the county and not going toward needed regional road projects.
Due to opposition from the plan from the autodealers, homebuilders and taxpayer watchdog groups like the Club, the Pinal Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) backed off on forcing a vote on the measure and has been working to figure out how to overcome the critisism of the $640M spending spree.
Their solution? They have asked Representative TJ Shope to sponsor special legislation to allow the RTA to include lower tax rates for certain tax classifications (likely automobiles and new home sales) as part of the proposed tax increase, an obvious attempt to buy off the political opposition to secure passage of the tax hike.
It is simply poor policy to create carve outs in the tax code that pick winners and losers among taxpayers. If Pinal County leaders believe more resources are needed for transportation, they ought to look internally first, both how they have managed past funds and prioritized transportation projects. We think they would find a great opportunity for improvement. And perhaps they could save their residents a little money too.
by admin | Jan 12, 2017 | News and Updates
While most people were enjoying the holidays with their family late last month, the local media was trumpeting a story declaring that Arizona has the lowest election integrity in the nation:
“Arizona was ranked worst in the country for electoral integrity in a recent post-election survey of political scientists.
The Perceptions of Electoral Integrity survey asked political experts about elections in the states where they live in order to measure their perceptions of how well or poorly their state adhered to international standards of conduct before, during and after an election.
Although it measures perceptions of electoral integrity, as opposed to actual electoral integrity itself, the methodology is widely trusted and used to compare electoral performance around the world.
The concern is that just the perception of electoral fraud or corruption, even without actual proof of fraud, could lead to a loss of public confidence in the voting process.”
While Arizona was the subject of some election controversy over the last year (the Presidential Preference Election comes to mind), being ranked dead last in election integrity should have generated some scrutiny by local journalists. Instead the media ran with the story, though a cursory look at the report and the organization behind it, the left leaning Electoral Integrity Project, would have exposed its shortcomings.
For example, the State of Michigan, which ended up having more votes cast in November than voters, somehow was ranked higher than Arizona in election integrity. Another common theme by the “experts” participating in the study was that states with stricter voter ID laws (such as Arizona and Wisconsin) consistently scored lower on election integrity than states with liberal voter ID laws like Michigan*. Though voter ID laws are controversial, including them as a component that erodes election integrity is an unfounded conclusion based upon the opinion of the authors.
Additionally, Arizona scores near the bottom on integrity when it comes to district boundaries and gerrymandering. That is a very peculiar result since Arizona has, unlike most other states, an independent redistricting commission that draws our legislative and congressional lines. Do the authors of the study (or the Arizona “experts” they talked to) have evidence of corruption on the commission that is worse than other states? Very doubtful, yet not a single reporter even questioned this finding.
Instead, the media completely accepted the work of an organization that in the past claimed that Cuba and North Korea had more election integrity than half the states in the US.
Now whether this happened because of an unwillingness to fact check or because of an underlying desire to believe the study, we will never know. And to the credit of the Arizona Republic, they are at least trying to clean up the mess. But the damage from the media coverage and the false narrative it created will continue to live on.
*Michigan passed a new voter ID law after the 2016 November Election
by admin | Jan 10, 2017 | News and Updates
Yesterday Governor Ducey gave his much anticipated State of the State speech, outlining his policy and budget agenda for this year. One of the better initiatives announced is a new program to identify and eliminate job-killing regulations.
Deemed the “Regulatory Rollback” initiative, this citizen driven program allows taxpayers and business owners to recommend rules and regulations that stifle growth and either need to be fixed or repealed. Anyone can make recommendations at the website http://azgovernor.gov/redtape/
The Governor’s goal is to slash 500 regulations by the end of 2017. The Club commends Ducey’s commitment to making Arizona the best and easiest state in which to start and grow a business, and urge every resident to visit www.azgovernor.gov/redtape/ to make recommendations on regulations to be eliminated.
by admin | Jan 5, 2017 | News and Updates
President Obama’s legacy is littered with sweeping Executive Orders, unprecedented levels of federal government expansion and the diminishment of state primacy. However, as the President prepares to vacate the White House, many of his hallmark policies face a dubious future. One such policy is the Clean Power Plan (CPP) written and administered by the Environmental Protection Agency.
The CPP rolled out in August of 2015 and it hit the states like a lightning rod. The plan requires states to meet specific carbon-cutting targets by 2030, based upon the levels of greenhouse gases they released from producing electricity in 2012. For Arizona, the EPA calls their goal “moderate,” however the target is to reduce 10 million short tons of emissions a staggering 25 percent.
Most of this reduction will come from coal. The draconian targets will require many states to plug smokestacks and decommission coal burning plants.
The U.S Energy Information Administration (EIA) has conducted its own modeling on the CPP. Their analysis predicts the CPP alone would force nearly 60 coal plants to close nationwide. Coal plants which since the 1990s have sunk $130 billion into upgrading their facilities. Following significant EPA rules in 2005, 67 percent of the coal fleet in the U.S had retrofitted some system for scrubbing, with momentous and positive results.
Thousands of jobs will disappear as a result of coal plant closures. But perhaps more saliently, energy production will be displaced and costs will increase to consumers. Arizona enjoys relatively low energy costs, a fact that makes the state attractive to big employers and affordable to residents. A new report by the Pacific Research Institute illustrates the CPP burden on consumers by state.
With almost a third of Arizona’s resident electricity being produced by coal, Maricopa County residents could see their electricity costs increase by 10.3 percent. Poor families will be hit disproportionally hard with costs that could equal 11.32 percent of their income. The Electricity Price Index has continued to rise with the coal losing more market share. With 48-50 million Americans in poverty, energy poverty will force many families to choose between climatizing their homes through brutal winters and summers or putting food on the table. This is why immediately following the roll out of the CPP, 28 states filed a suit against the EPA.
As the litigation and political fallout continues from these regulations, the question now is what will the Trump administration do with the Clean Power Plan? Given that the new proposed head of the EPA, Scott Pruitt, was one of the first attorney generals to sue the EPA, the hope is that the plan will be quickly dismantled. Couple that with Trump’s appointment to the Supreme Court, it is possible that we might see the EPA’s power grab struck down. Elections do have consequences, which means the future for energy freedom and state’s rights looks just a little bit brighter.
by admin | Dec 15, 2016 | News and Updates
It has only been a month and the recently approved minimum wage initiative, Proposition 206, is already inflicting permanent damage on Arizona’s Economy, hardworking taxpayers and our most vulnerable and needy residents.
Similar to previous proposals, Prop 206 was sold on the idea that Arizona could raise its minimum wage to $12 an hour (adjusted for inflation every year thereafter) and require employers offer mandated paid sick leave to employees without any negative repercussions. Reading the fine print of Prop 206 exposed this fraudulent claim; as the funders of the initiative (California Unions) exempted collective bargaining agreements from critical components of the initiative. If this was so good, why exempt themselves from it?
Now the debilitating impacts of Prop 206 are being felt, and they are far more widespread and catastrophic than even the opponents of the initiative realized. While it wasn’t a secret that Arizona businesses would face hard choices in order to comply with the wage hike, some of the worst hit organizations will be those that serve the neediest and most vulnerable populations in our state.
Currently in-home care services, many of which aid fragile and feeble seniors, range from $20-$24 an hour. These services will go up; pricing out many of these seniors on fixed-incomes from receiving the care they desperately need or force more individuals onto state welfare rolls.
The developmentally disabled in our community will also be devastated by Proposition 206. According to the President and CEO of the Centers for Habilitation and member of the Arizona Association of Providers for People with Disabilities, some providers will be forced to close operations as soon as January 1, 2017.
Some of these providers have contracts with the State of Arizona that set the reimbursement rates. This means the state will be forced to allocate more taxpayer money to cover the higher costs. If the state doesn’t cough up more tax dollars to address these needs, thousands of developmentally disabled in Arizona will be left without vital care.
It only gets worse from here.
Many subdivisions of the state such as school districts will also be deeply impacted by the voter mandate. Positions such as cross walk guards cafeteria workers and bus drivers, many of which are part time positions, represent a significant aggregate cost to schools; costs which were neither anticipated nor planned for by districts or the state.
For Chandler Unified School District, Prop 206’s passage represents a $1.1 million hit to their budget. Agua Fria Union High School District in the West Valley, $123,500. Peoria Unified District – $1.1 million by 2020. And Sahuarita District in southern Arizona $907,576. These are tremendous costs which will necessitate the diversion of other resources from teachers and students or require more monies from taxpayers.
And although the law does not apply to state or federal agencies, many government departments will still be on the hook. The State of Arizona has expenditure obligations for school districts as well as private contracts through AHCCCS (Arizona Healthcare Cost Containment Center System). But the legislature has already passed a budget for 2017. These additional costs were not included in the state’s budget.
Many voters that supported Prop 206 were not aware of the harmful effects this initiative would cause. Yet unlike bills proposed and passed at the legislature, there was no independent review, hearings, or public comment process of the initiative language to inform voters of these inevitable issues.
Now, even if voters wanted these issues fixed, Prop 206 can’t be modified because Arizona initiatives are bound by the strictest voter protection law in the country. Once a measure is passed at the ballot, it can’t be changed unless it is sent back to the voters, and that can’t happen for two years.
As the saying goes, “elections have consequences.” We suspect that the consequences of Prop 206, however, are not what Arizona voters signed up for.
by admin | Dec 8, 2016 | News and Updates
Amid some discussion by Republican leaders to thwart President-Elect Trump from moving to completely repeal Obamacare, it is clear Republicans must have a definitive plan to not just repeal, but replace the current disastrous healthcare law.
And at this point, with millions of middle class Americans facing sky-rocketing premiums, narrow networks, and shoddy benefits, something must be done quickly. Perhaps the most comprehensive plan to address the healthcare system has been offered by House Speaker Paul Ryan. Ryan’s general approach is to loosen the grip of central federal control and return power to the states to improve the flexibility, efficiency, costs, and quality of healthcare for their unique populations.
Unfortunately, many states (including Arizona) expanded their Medicaid rolls to take advantage of federal matching subsidies, and will face an extra layer of complexity following a repeal. Without precedence, this Medicaid expansion was extended to include able-bodied adults who are 138 percent over the federal poverty line (FPL). This represented an additional 63,000 beneficiaries in Arizona alone. Repealing Obamacare poses a significant problem for these states as they will either be left with huge state budget deficits to make up for the loss of federal funding, or potentially be forced to kick tens of thousands of people off the health subsidies.
But there are common sense solutions to address this problem and others.
The current process for states to reform their Medicaid program is to go to the Federal Government on bended knee and apply for a waiver. As expected, these waivers have been granted with mixed approval and endure a lengthy and oftentimes politicized process. In the meantime, states struggle to shoulder increasing costs and face uncertainty whether they will be able to hedge those costs.
A critical component of Ryan’s plan is to reform the waiver process and divest more power in the states. This includes creating a set of predictable parameters, fast tracking requests that meet those parameters, and then not requiring a renewal of such waivers. The plan also requires that Medicaid waivers be federal budget neutral as a way to reduce costs and protect taxpayers from states looking to game the system.
Another key component of reform is to address the issue of able-bodied adults on Medicaid being completely insulated from the true costs of healthcare. It is critical that any reform allow states to charge reasonable premiums, offer more limited benefits, and allow waiting lists and enrollment caps for non-mandatory populations. Additionally, those states that currently have a waiver for managed care that have been previously renewed twice would be grandfathered in and not have to seek another renewal. Obamacare has incentivized able-bodied adults to remain dependent instead of self-sufficient; empowering states to make these common sense and well proven reforms is a step in the right direction.
The last key component is identifying a way to contain the spiraling costs of Medicaid. Currently Medicaid represents 15 percent of all federal healthcare spending and is growing fast. The program is unsustainable, and states must be weaned off this open ended entitlement program. One such proposal is for the federal government to allocate money to states in the form of “block grants.” Going to a block grant would mean that each state would receive a defined amount of funding for a base year and assume the state is transitioning non-mandatory populations into other coverage over time. If states are working toward streamlining costs, any savings realized could remain with the state instead of federal coffers.
Obamacare has come with a great deal of cost and pain for individuals, families, businesses, and state governments alike. It is unlikely that the transition away from it will be painless either. However, not reversing course cannot be an option for Republican leaders in Washington. Now is not the time to get cold feet. After all it should not be impossible to imagine a healthcare system driven by free market principles and individual choice rather than government mandates and punishments.
Recent Comments