Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Bob Burns’

Senate reaches filing deadline; fewer bills on tap

February 1st, 2010

The bill moratorium is over, but senators still filed fewer bills this year than they did last year.

This year, 443 bills were filed in the Senate before the Feb. 1 deadline. The House still has another week before representatives are cut off.

That’s down from the 469 bills that were filed in the before the Senate’s deadline last year, while Senate President Bob Burns was enforcing a ban on non-budget bills. The moratorium was lifted this year, but it was replaced by a stern warning to introduce only bills that were of the highest priority.

Apparently, the senators listened.

Normally, the bill totals in the Senate are around 500. In 2008, for instance, 505 bills were filed before the deadline.

Everyone knows, however, that the bill deadlines don’t mean much. Bills that aren’t going anywhere can be re-written as strike-through amendments, and that happens quite a bit. And the Senate president or speaker of the House can give special permission to file bills after the deadline, which happens often when budget bills are introduced.

In any case, lawmakers were more prolific in at least one category this year: They’ve filed more memorials and resolutions than normal. This year, there are 70 memorials and resolutions in the Senate. That compares to the 52 miscellaneous bills filed last year and the 51 miscellaneous bills in 2008.

Pierce replaces Gorman on Senate Finance Committee

January 26th, 2010

Sen. Pamela Gorman’s resignation of her Senate seat on Jan. 25 created a vacancy in the Senate Finance Committee, where she served as member.

Senate President Bob Burns wasted no time filling the seat. On Jan. 26, he appointed Senate Majority Whip Steve Pierce to serve as a temporary replacement on the committee.

Author: Categories: General Tags: , ,

Lawmakers’ first duty: Show up and vote

January 5th, 2010

Here’s the simple mathematics of representative government: Arizona taxpayers pay for lawmakers to show up and vote on every bill in the Legislature. Now here’s the flaw in that equation: Lawmakers get paid whether they show up or not.

Unfortunately, many Arizona residents were underrepresented at the Capitol during last year’s regular legislative session. It was a dismal performance by the 21 lawmakers who failed to show up for one out of every five floor votes.

There were many excuses: late-night votes, last-minute calls to the floor, the fact that their votes wouldn’t change the final outcome, etc. It’s true that the session was marked by poor planning, rules changes and an inability to gain consensus on many substantial bills. It’s also a fact that most lawmakers have jobs outside the Capitol, and many had to travel long distances to Phoenix from their homes in outlying areas.

Still, they were elected for a singular purpose that in some cases went unfulfilled. If they don’t vote, their constituents may as well have checked a box on the ballot for “nobody.”

In the Senate, two Democrats from Phoenix – Sen. Debbie McCune Davis and Sen. Ken Cheuvront – topped the list of missed votes. The geography is significant; they live much closer to the Capitol than Republican Sen. Sylvia Allen, who has to drive about six hours roundtrip from her home in Snowflake. Allen, by the way, didn’t miss any floor votes.

Rep. Rich Crandall, a Mesa Republican, missed 254 of the 382 House votes. Did you catch that – Mesa, a Phoenix suburb. In comparison, Republican Rep. Nancy McClain has a seven-hour roundtrip from Bullhead City and didn’t miss any votes.

For the same reason it’s important that voters recognize who is not representing them, they also should take note of those who make it a priority to be in chambers when it matters.

Eleven representatives and seven senators voted on every single measure that reached the floor. All of them were Republicans, and five of them were freshmen.

Last week, we published a list of lawmakers who missed the final vote on measures during the 2009 session (it didn’t include missed votes in committee). But we failed to call attention to those who had perfect attendance on the floor.

So, here’s a list of lawmakers who deserve a gold star – not necessarily for the way they voted, but for rising above the rest to make sure their constituents had a seat at the table when the state’s newest laws were crafted:

Rep. Frank Antenori, R-Tucson (District 30)
Rep. Judy Burges, R-Skull Valley (District 4)
Rep. David Gowan, R-Sierra Vista (District 30)
Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills (District 8 )
Rep. Debbie Lesko, R-Glendale (District 9)
Rep. John McComish, R-Phoenix (District 20)
Rep. Nancy McLain, R-Bullhead City (District 3)
Rep. Carl Seel, R-Phoenix (District 6)
Rep. Andy Tobin, R-Phoenix (District 1)
Rep. Jim Weiers, R-Phoenix (District 10)
Rep. Steve Yarbrough, R-Chandler (District 21)
Sen. Sylvia Allen, R-Snowflake (District 5)
Sen. Bob Burns, R-Peoria (District 9)
Sen. Chuck Gray, R-Mesa (District 19)
Sen. Barbara Leff, R-Paradise Valley (District 11)
Sen. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa (District 18)
Sen. Steve Pierce, R-Prescott (District 1)
Sen. Jim Waring, R-Phoenix (District 7)

Unity among lawmakers sends strong message to Brewer

July 7th, 2009

It was, without question, a strange set of circumstances that led to the unanimous approval of four budget bills on July 6. Four months of infighting among Republicans. A legal challenge of the original GOP-authored state budget. Sweeping vetoes by a Republican governor. A last-minute effort to involve Democrats. And Bob Burns letting lose a tirade of criticism for whom many people expected to be the Republicans’ next best hope for retaining the Ninth Floor.

Yet, somehow, 70 or more lawmakers were able to agree on the four budget bills. And nobody in the House or the Senate opposed them.

So, it’s notable anytime the Arizona Legislature votes unanimously for anything of substance; lawmakers do find themselves in accord, perhaps a dozen or more times each year, but usually on minor, technical changes. Yet the newfound camaraderie between Republican and Democratic lawmakers exhibited on the first day of the special session seems to send a strong signal to the Gov. Jan Brewer that the Legislature intends to assert control over the rest of the budget process – whether Brewer likes the final package or not.

After all, it would be very difficult, if not completely impractical, for the governor to reject a budget that has solid bipartisan support, even if it doesn’t include her proposal for a sales tax increase. Forty representatives and 20 senators can override her veto.

That doesn’t mean Brewer won’t get what she wants; legislative leadership plans to meet tomorrow to discuss other budget issues that have yet to be resolved, and lawmakers still need to come up with the revenue to plug a deficit of at least $2 billion. A tax increase may be used to raise revenue, more cuts may be enacted, the state may sell additional assets or even borrow into the future.

That will be decided sometime after lawmakers restart the special session on July 13, which, by the way, is Brewer’s deadline to sign or reject the 180 or so non-budget bills that were passed in the final weeks of the regular session. The weeklong delay, intentionally or not, removes any possibility that Brewer could hold hostage any non-budget bills while trying to negotiate a positive resolution to her sales tax proposal.

Meanwhile, Brewer has given all appearances that she’s thrilled by the Legislature’s swift action. She told Capitol Times reporter Jeremy Duda that the additional $400 million for education included in H2001 shows that lawmakers have responded to her calls to protect public schools’ funding and that they intend to come up with some way to raise the revenue necessary for a balanced budget.

That seems logical to a point; Brewer has indeed been pushing for shallower cuts to education, and her vetoes made possible the second round of budget bills. But then she went on to say it wouldn’t surprise her if lawmakers passed a sales tax increase on their own. In other words, no referendum.

Hmmm. Not sure what to make of that, considering it was not possible to rally a simple majority to approve a ballot measure that would allow voters to decide for themselves whether to raise sales taxes. So, rounding up a legislative supermajority to support a measure that would raise taxes without asking voters seems like wishful thinking. Politically – and for some, ideologically – that scenario is completely unpalatable.

Even after Brewer convinced Senate President Bob Burns to prop up her sales tax referral in the final days of the regular session, it’s highly unlikely he would vote for legislation that increases taxes without allowing voters to weigh in. Add to that list Sens. Russell Pearce, Jack Harper, Ron Gould, Thayer Verschoor, Jim Waring, Steve Pierce, Chuck Gray, Pamela Gorman, Sylvia Allen and others – and that’s just in the Senate.

Many Republicans in the House also have warned Brewer to count them out. And Democrats in both chambers have withheld support for raising the state sales tax.

So, to me, the unanimous vote on the four budget bills carries a much different message than Brewer seems to have received. One way of looking at it is that lawmakers are saying she can veto all she wants, but to no avail. And that wouldn’t bode well for her tax plan.

With 2010 around the corner, Democrats wouldn’t be too upset if Brewer emerges from this chaos looking as though she lacks the political muscle to push her agenda. And, judging by Burns’ recent comments about Brewer’s leadership abilities, it might not disappoint him too much either.

In this case, unanimity among lawmakers, many of whom weren’t involved in serious budget talks until last week, should be somewhat unsettling to Brewer, even if she did get part of what she had requested.

Author: Categories: General Tags: , , ,

Brewer v. Legislature – highlights from today’s hearing

June 23rd, 2009

Myriad Republican lawmakers attended this morning’s Arizona Supreme Court hearing in the legal challenge that pits Gov. Jan Brewer against top Republicans in the Legislature. The hearing lasted about an hour, with both sides given 30 minutes to present their arguments to the five state Supreme Court justices.

Republicans in the gallery included: Sen. Chuck Gray, Sen. Russell Pearce, Rep. John Kavanagh, Sen. Jack Harper, Senate President Bob Burns, Rep. Doug Quelland and House Speaker Kirk Adams. There were too many Republican lawmakers to name, actually, but few, if any, Democrats.

Capitol Times reporters Christian Palmer and Jeremy Duda were there to scrounge some news for the paper, and came back with a few quick highlights.

Here’s the skinny: 

The justices cut short attorneys arguments about the political battle behind the legal challenge that has pitted Brewer against top Republican lawmakers. They instead sought answers about why they should accept Brewer’s petition for special action, asking for an explanation for how Brewer would be harmed if the court refused to accept the case.

Justice Andrew Hurwitz surmised that a veto of the budget was in the future, anyway, otherwise the case wouldn’t have been brought up.

Brewer’s attorney Joe Kanefield said Brewer’s intentions regarding the budget measures shouldn’t figure into the legal analysis. Most importantly, he said, the Legislature should submit the bills to Brewer in order to allow her the proper time to review and act on the bills. Holding off could lead to a shutdown of government services.

Justices sought Kanefield’s input on whether the governor wants an immediate order to leadership to submit the bills or some sort of an established test to determine what constitutes a “reasonable time” for bills to be turned over.

Kanefield said the goal is an immediate order stating that the nature of the bills, considering they are appropriations bills, demanded action. “It is different and deserving of special treatment,” he said.

The attorney representing the Legislature, David Cantelme, claimed the governor wanted the bills transfered simply to gain a political advantage – but he was interrupted by Justice Scott Bales, who asked “Isn’t that why the Legislature is holding them?”

Cantelme said there’s still time for the Legislature to vote to suspend its rules to rescind or reconsider the budget bills. “Any member of the Senate could upset the apple cart if they could command 16 votes.”

The timing of transferring bills to the governor is strictly the prerogative of the Legislature, Cantelme argued.

The justices gave no indication of whether they will accept jurisdiction of the case. It’s unclear when the court will announce its intentions.