AZ Policy Wonk

The cloud of irony surrounding Dean Martin on June 8 was so thick that it must have been difficult for him to see how quickly his campaign was swirling down the drain.

The U.S. Supreme Court decision to block matching funds threatens the viability of dozens of political candidates in Arizona, but it put a special kind of hurt on Martin, whose gubernatorial ambitions seem futile without the millions of dollars he was expecting to receive from Arizona’s Clean Elections system.

RELATED: Major races impacted by matching funds ruling

Martin is running third in the polls behind Gov. Jan Brewer and Buz Mills, and his campaign has been devoid of excitement for the past couple of months. When matching funds were wiped out, Martin lost perhaps his only chance to turn things around in time for the Aug. 24 primary.

What seemed obvious to many political insiders, though, must have eluded Martin, who insisted that the court ruling would not derail his campaign. In fact, Martin told reporters that his “real” opponent in the race was Brewer, while discounting Mills as a floundering candidate who is trying vainly to buy the election.

There are several possible explanations for Martin’s preposterous assessment of the governor’s race, but there is evidence to suggest that he was suffering from some sort of irony-induced malady that blotted out his view of reality.

The whole Martin/Clean Elections saga is so full of paradoxes that it’s difficult to pinpoint exactly which one is the most dominant. Here are a couple options: Martin was one of the first politicians to take legal action against matching funds, and then he signed up to qualify for them. Later, his gubernatorial campaign was relying on more than $2 million in matching funds, and then his own lawsuit wiped them out.

It all started in 2004 when Martin, a state senator at the time, became the lead plaintiff in the original federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of public campaign financing. He teamed up with the Institute for Justice to wage a legal fight on grounds that Arizona’s Clean Elections system violates free speech rights by diluting the effect and value of money spent by candidates who raise money from private donors.

That lawsuit was dismissed, appealed and ignored. But Martin later joined the 2008 lawsuit against matching funds – the one now in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court – as a plaintiff.

Until this year, Martin’s relationship with Clean Elections was uncomplicated: He despised the system and said it was fundamentally flawed. He said it was unfair. He characterized it as un-American. He was on the front lines in the battle to eliminate it. And whether you agreed with him or not, his position was clearly definable.

But everything got murky when Martin decided that his best chance – some say his only chance – of winning the governor’s race would be to run as a Clean Elections candidate and balance his campaign on the expectation of matching funds. So he joined the system he was trying to destroy, conveniently setting aside his convictions in favor of political gain.

At the time, Martin told reporters his decision was strategic: Clean Elections provides an advantage, therefore he would use it.

It’s difficult to imagine that Martin would have been able to raise enough money to counter the spending by Mills, or even Brewer, if she had decided to raise private donations. But at least he would have been able to retain some dignity by sticking to his beliefs, even if it meant losing the race.

Now that the Supreme Court has blocked matching funds, Martin appears to be headed toward defeat anyway. While Brewer is in a similar position – stuck with about $707,000 and no chance of getting more – she has the advantage of incumbency and what appears to be a strong lead in the polls. Plus, she got a lot of free publicity by appearing on a round of television commercials in support of the sales tax measure that passed last month.

While there are a lot of reasons to respect Martin, his hypocrisy regarding Clean Elections gives people a big reason to distrust him. Voters sometimes excuse politicians for making bad decisions, but they tend to hold grudges against those who shrug off deep-rooted convictions. If anyone is paying attention to Martin’s folly with Clean Elections, they’re likely to seek a different kind of leadership.

-Matt Bunk is managing editor of the Arizona Capitol Times.

While today’s special election on Proposition 100 seems to have garnered more attention than most, nobody is watching the results more closely than Gov. Jan Brewer, who has tied her political future to the temporary one-cent sales tax increase.

There’s no doubt Brewer has made the sales tax increase a cornerstone of her administration, and she will try to claim a political victory if it passes tonight. But in fact, she may be vulnerable to criticism whether the measure passes or fails. No matter what happens at the polls tonight, all three of Brewer’s main challengers in the GOP primary are expected to launch attacks on Brewer for supporting higher taxes while the state’s economy continues to struggle.

If the measure passes, look for Brewer to get a temporary boost in the polls, but expect her opponents to chip away at her support over the long run.

The passage of Prop. 100 would come over the objections of many Republican voters and to the glee of many Democrats, most of whom aren’t planning to vote for Brewer this fall anyway. Voters who oppose the measure generally are going to vote in the Republican primary, and those Republican voters may hold the tax increase against Brewer if Dean Martin, Buz Mills and John Munger launch effective campaigns slamming her for hindering economic recovery.

If voters shoot down the sales tax increase, Brewer may lose some of the momentum she gained by agreeing to sue the federal government over the health care law and by signing Senate Bill 1070. She appears to be the frontrunner right now, but she would likely take a hit in the polls if voters reject Prop. 100 because she may be seen as an ineffective leader who was unable to secure enough support for a proposal that was a top priority for her administration. On top of that, her GOP opponents still will attack her for advocating a tax increase, and they would have the added benefit of being able to remind voters that they rejected Brewer’s idea. 

Candidate elections aside, the fate of the sales tax measure will obviously impact the state’s budget because it was a major part of the spending plan approved in March by lawmakers. If it fails, there will be a large hole in the budget. However, in anticipation of that, they crafted a series of contingency cuts that would be automatically enacted if Prop. 100 fails.

Those cuts total $862 million, and include large budget reductions for K-12 education ($429 million), AHCCCS ($114 million), universities ($107 million), the Department of Health Services ($40 million) and the Department of Public Safety ($11 million).

Although those cuts are triggered if the ballot measure fails, a special legislative session may be in the works if voters reject Prop. 100. Gov. Brewer has said a special session would be necessary to make sure the technical mechanisms are in place for the cuts, but most Capitol observers believe it’s because lawmakers don’t really want to make those deep cuts – especially to education – in an election year that has already seen more than $1 billion in cuts.

People who watched television news this weekend might be confused into thinking that Monday’s “emergency” meeting of Governor’s Office policy advisers is significant – as if some sort of budget solution will emerge now that the governor has gotten serious. 

Those of us who spend more time at the Capitol know it’s a publicity stunt. It’s the kind of PR move initiated by people who know more about lobbying and campaigning than they do about actually communicating with the public and the media. 

Tack on the word “emergency,” and it looks as if something is finally going to shake loose after more than a year of budget problems and months of deadlock on how to close the deficit. And, of course, television reporters who spend about five hours per year covering the Capitol will jump on board and exclaim to hundreds of thousands of at-home viewers that the governor is rushing to action now that the Legislature has failed to close a $1.6 billion deficit.

These TV reporters will stand in front of the cameras with stern looks on their faces as if they understand how dire a situation this really is, but the fact is that they know far more about chasing ambulances than they do about state government. (On Saturday, one television station reported a statement from House Minority Leader David Lujan, pronouncing his last name as Loo-jen.)

Those of us who spend 10-12 hours per day at the Capitol are much more suspicious about the notion that the governor’s emergency meeting will produce anything other than sound bites to aid her election campaign. And, if we’re wrong, then why hasn’t she taken a more active role in the legislative process so far? Why has she waited until now – halfway through the fiscal year – to call an emergency meeting?

The longer it takes to come up with a solution, the tougher it is to balance the state budget. We’re six months into fiscal 2010, so we have only six months to cut spending from a budget that is already half-spent. The roughly $8 billion state pie that was available for adjustments in July has been eaten away to about $4 billion.

For 11 months now, the governor’s spokespeople have said as little as possible about the governor’s plans to solve the budget problems. In fact, when the Capitol press corps asks questions about the budget, Brewer’s communications office says pithy things like “She’s in the process of talking to legislative leaders now to come up with solutions that will be something lawmakers and the public can support.” Asked for more details, they decline comment. It’s happened hundreds of times during Brewer’s time in office.

We ask for time with the governor, and we are told she’s too busy to talk to the media. So we follow her to luncheons and other public appearances, and listen to the same speeches over and over, just so we can ask two or three quick questions as the governor is herded into an awaiting car by her staff.

And now they’ve called a dog-and-pony show – and opened it to the media – to give an impression that the governor has a plan and that she’s ready to make things happen. Make no mistake, there will be lots of media at the meeting. It will be packed with video cameras and people with recorders and notebooks, ready to capture every sound bite. Our reporters will be there too.

But you will have to forgive me for being skeptical. The only plan we’ve seen from the governor so far is a proposal to raise sales taxes, a plan that, by the way, lacks the necessary support from the Legislature. And, even if lawmakers pass a referendum and allow voters to have a say, it might fail at the ballot anyway. And if it does pass, it’s only going to fill about one-third of the fiscal 2011 deficit – it’s far too late for a sales tax increase to rescue the fiscal 2010 budget. 

The bottom line: Gov. Brewer is in a weak spot politically. She can’t seem to rally support among members of her own party for the one thing that she continues to ask for over and over. And she’s facing an election in which she is not considered the favorite. She’s tried to be tough with the Legislature – taking them to court on one occasion, vetoing budget bills on another – and she’s even tried to play nice with them by agreeing to spending cuts that she had opposed on prior occasions. Nothing has worked.

So, now we have an emergency meeting of her cabinet members. Look for lots of bluster, little substance and probably a lot of backlash from lawmakers after it’s all over. But there is a bright side for Brewer: The television media doesn’t know enough about politics to pick up on it, and the staged drama will probably be on every evening newscast in the state. Good for election campaigns, bad for the people of Arizona.

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio received a high approval rating in the most recent Cronkite/Eight poll.

Sixty-one percent of Maricopa County voters said they approve or strongly approve of his job performance. Thirty-four percent disapprove or strongly disapprove.

It’s one of those love-him-or-hate-him kinds of things, as most voters logged in with a “strongly” response. Thirty-nine percent said they strongly approve of the job he’s doing, while 22 percent strongly disapproved. Four percent said they had no opinion.

The poll was conducted Oct. 22-25 by the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University and Eight/KAET.

Also, county voters disagreed overwhelmingly with the federal government’s decision to strip the sheriff’s department of a portion of its 287(g) agreement that allowed deputies to enforce U.S. immigration law during crime-suppression sweeps. Sixty percent disagreed with the decision, while 36 percent agreed. Again, four percent said they had no opinion.

An analysis that was released along with the poll results noted, however, that “Republicans, people with lower levels of formal education, and social conservatives were most supportive of the sheriff; Democrats, voters with higher levels of formal education, and social moderates were least supportive.”

The poll also gauged voters’ approval ratings for Treasurer Dean Martin, Secretary of State Ken Bennett, Attorney General Terry Goddard, Gov. Jan Brewer and Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas.

Not only that, but respondents were asked about swine flu and national health care reform. Full results are below.

The statewide sample of 652 registered voters was 37 percent Republican, 34 percent Democrat and 29 percent Independent. Fifty-nine percent of the interviews were conducted in Maricopa County, 17 percent in Pima County and 24 percent in Arizona’s other counties. Forty-nine percent of the voters interviewed were men and 51 percent are women. The sampling error for the statewide sample survey is plus or minus 3.8 percent. The sampling error for the Maricopa County sample, which included 389 registered voters, is plus or minus 5.0 percent.

Question wording:

First, please tell me if you approve or disapprove of the job the following Arizona state-level officials are doing. If you don’t feel you know enough about how they are doing to have an opinion, just tell me and I’ll go on to the next one. Let’s start with Governor Jan Brewer. Do you strongly approve, approve, disapprove or strongly disapprove of the job she is doing?

 Overall / Among those with an opinion
 strongly approve    2%     2%
 approve   37%   48%
 disapprove   30%   39%
 strongly disapprove    9%   11%
 don’t know/no opinion 22%   

How about the job Terry Goddard is doing as attorney general?  Do you strongly approve, approve, disapprove or strongly disapprove of the job he is doing?

Overall / Among those with an opinion
 strongly approve  11%   15%
 approve   44%   61%
 disapprove   13%   18%
 strongly disapprove    4%     6%
 don’t know/no opinion 28%  

What about the job Ken Bennett is doing as secretary of state?  Do you strongly approve, approve, disapprove or strongly disapprove of the job he is doing?

 Overall / Among those with an opinion
 strongly approve    1%     3%
 approve   19%   61%
 disapprove     9%   30%
 strongly disapprove    2%     6%
 don’t know/no opinion 69%  

How about the job Dean Martin is doing as state treasurer?  Do you strongly approve, approve, disapprove or strongly disapprove of the job he is doing?

 Overall / Among those with an opinion
 strongly approve    7%   14%
 approve   25%   50%
 disapprove    15%   31%
 strongly disapprove    3%     5%
 don’t know/no opinion 50%   

How important do you think it is for Congress to vote this year on a bill to reform our health care system? Do you think it is very important, important, not very important, or not at all important?

 very important   48%
 important   19%
 not very important  11%
 not at all important  19%
 don’t know/no opinion   3%

Would you favor or oppose creating a public health insurance option administered by the federal government that would compete with plans offered by private insurance companies?

favor    44%
oppose    49%
don’t know/no opinion   7%

Now, turning to the swine flu, when a vaccination becomes readily available in Arizona, will you get a swine flu vaccination?

 yes    41%
 no    54%
 don’t know/no opinion   5%

Regardless of how you feel about getting a swine flu vaccination, have you had or will you have a regular flu shot this year?
yes    58%
no    41%
don’t know/no opinion   1%

IF MARICOPA COUNTY:  Please tell me if you approve or disapprove of the job the following Maricopa County officials are doing. Again, if you don’t have enough information about how they are doing to rate them, just tell me and I’ll go to the next person. Let’s start with County Attorney Andrew Thomas. Do you strongly approve, approve, disapprove or strongly disapprove (9%/14) of the job he is doing?

 Overall / Among those with an opinion
 strongly approve  12%   17%
 approve   32%   47%
 disapprove   14%   22%
 strongly disapprove    9%   14%
 don’t know/no opinion 33%  

IF MARICOPA COUNTY:  How about the job Sheriff Joe Arpaio is doing.  Do you strongly approve, approve, disapprove or strongly disapprove of the job he is doing?

 Overall / Among those with an opinion
 strongly approve  39%   41%
 approve   22%   23%
 disapprove   13%   14%
 strongly disapprove  22%   22%
 don’t know/no opinion   4%  

IF MARICOPA COUNTY:  Under an agreement with the federal government, the Maricopa County sheriff’s department has had the authority to arrest illegal immigrants in the community and to screen the immigration status of people booked into the county jail. Recently, the federal government restricted Sheriff Arpaio to ONLY checking the immigration status of people when they are checked into jail. Do you agree or disagree with the decision to limit Arpaio’s immigration authority?

 agree    36% 
 disagree   60% 
 don’t know/no opinion   4%

Another poll shows dismal approval ratings for Gov. Jan Brewer. This time, pollsters contrasted her performance, as judged by Arizona residents, with those of former governors Janet Napolitano and Jane Hull.

And, if the approval/disapproval ratings of former governors can be used as a benchmark, Brewer has a lot to worry about heading into 2010.

Only 22 percent of the 800 people interviewed for the latest Rocky Mountain Poll (conducted Sept. 9-18 by the Behavior Research Center) said they approve of Brewer’s performance. That’s down from 24 percent approval in May when a similar poll was conducted.

At the same time, the percentage of voters who disapprove of her performance went up by two percent. Twenty-eight percent rated her performance as “poor,” compared to 26 percent in May.

Both of the figures above fall within the margin of error for the poll, so maybe they don’t mean much. And there is still the murky designation of “fair,” which 30 percent of voters used to rate Brewer (it was 32 percent in May).

But there is something that has changed signicantly, and it could hurt Brewer in the primary unless the trend changes.

Republicans who took part in the latest poll were far more negative about her performance than they were four months ago. Now, 27 percent of GOP respondents said they disapprove of Brewer, compared to 18 percent who disapproved in May. That 9 percent difference is a big deal, whether or not the other numbers have meaning. 

Likely voters in Maricopa County were the most critical toward the governor – 32 percent negative to 24 percent favorable. Her reviews are also slipped in Rural Arizona – 18 percent favorable to 24 percent negative.

As was mentioned above, Brewer’s ratings are dismal compared to her predecessors. A media release that was distributed along with the poll figures states, “Voter assessment of the Governor remain significantly lower than those of her two predecessors, Janet Napolitano and Jane Hull, clear evidence that her struggles with GOP lawmakers over taxes and the 2010 budget have had an enduring impact.”

Here are the actual results and the exact wording of the question regarding Brewer’s performance that was asked during the survey:

“Next, I’d like to read you the names of some public officials. As I read each one, please just
tell me if you think the job they are doing in office is excellent, good, fair, poor or very
poor.”

EARLY JOB RATINGS FOR ARIZONA GOVERNORS
                                           Excellent/Good    Fair       Poor/Very Poor      (Net Pos to Neg)
Jan Brewer           – Sept 2009     22%              30%                 28%                        (-6)
                           - May 2009      24%             32%                 26%                         (-2)
Janet Napolitano – Oct 2003       46%             30%                 16%                        (+30)
                           -April 2003      49%             24%                 10%                       (+39)
Jane Hull             – Jan 1998        56%             20%                  3%                        (+53)
                           – Oct 1997        45%            20%                  4%                        (+41)

CURRENT READINGS FOR GOVERNOR JAN BREWER
Total population                          22%             20%                 28%                       (-6)
Registered voters only                 24%             28%                 31%                       (-7)
Republicans                                 30%             28%                 27%                       (+3)
Independents                               16%             26%                 38%                      (-22)
Democrats                                   24%             30%                  31%                      (-7)
Maricopa                                      24%             28%                 32%                       (-8)
Pima                                             23%             30%                 19%                       (+4)
Rural                                            18%             34%                 24%                       (-6)

To see the full results of this and other polls by the Behavior Research Center, go to www.brcpolls.com.

Even I was surprised by the results of our online poll. I expected Dean Martin to rank highly, as well as Jan Brewer. But I had no idea Vernon Parker would top the results.

On Sept. 9 we asked readers to vote for the person they would most want to see as the Republican nominee for governor in 2010. During the past 12 days, we were overwhelmed with responses. Though the methodology was not scientific, I do believe the results are interesting, if not significant - especially considering most of our readers vote in every election and the fact that we had 824 responses.

Parker, the mayor of Paradise Valley, pretty much stomped on the other 10 people who were listed as possible gubernatorial candidates. He tallied 298 votes (36 percent), topping all other candidates by a wide margin. Next was state Treasurer Dean Martin with 230 votes (28 percent). The rest trailed far behind.

The list didn’t include most of the political neophytes who have filed committees so far, but it did include most of the people who’s names have been circulated in recent months. We started the poll days before Fife Symington told the Yellow Sheet that he was considering a run, so he wasn’t included.

But perhaps even more interesting was that Brewer, the incumbent, came in third, in a tie with Len Munsil, who ran an unsuccessful campaign for governor in 2006 against Janet Napolitano. Both Brewer and Munsil garnered 70 votes (8 percent).

U.S. Rep. Jeff Flake, who hasn’t indicated any intention to run for governor, pulled down 50 votes (6 percent). U.S. Rep. John Shadegg, who also hasn’t said anything about running for governor, received 35 votes (4 percent). Secretary of State Ken Bennett received 27 votes; former U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters got 20 votes; former Arizona Republican Party Chairman John Munger got 10 votes; former Graham County Sheriff Richard Mack got 9 votes; and businessman Robert Graham got 5 votes. 

Our poll allows only one vote per person, although there was nothing stopping any of the candidates to solicit votes from friends, relatives and staff members. Perhaps Parker (or Jason Rose) wanted to generate some buzz and talked up our poll to those in his camp. Perhaps Brewer ignored our poll – after all, she was sort of busy.

But in any case, the poll was the first that I’ve seen that put these GOP candidates in a head-to-head matchup. And the results have at least made me give a little more weight to a Parker candidacy, which, by the way, he is expected to kick off this week.

Those of us in the Capitol Times newsroom just spent nearly an hour discussing Fife Symington’s revelation to the Yellow Sheet that he is leaning toward a run for governor in 2010, and we can’t come to a consensus about whether he’s serious.

Some of us believe he sincerely wants to run, and that he eventually will. Others, though, aren’t so sure. After all, he said a few years back that he was planning to run against Janet Napolitano in the 2006 gubernatorial election, and then backed out a few months later saying he wanted to concentrate on running his consulting business, The Symington Group.

It’s notable that he’s got more baggage than any of the other Republicans who have considered a campaign. He was convicted of bank fraud in 1997 and had to resign as governor because state law doesn’t allow felons to hold state office. Two years later, his conviction was overturned by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and he was later pardoned by his old pal Bill Clinton.

At the same time, he might have more name recognition than most of the other potential candidates. He was governor for more than six years, starting in 1991. He has a large band of loyal supporters in GOP ranks. He should have no problem raising enough money to sustain a bid. And his family has a deep background in politics.

Yet many of his former cohorts are now in Gov. Brewer’s camp, so which way would they gravitate if both decide to run? It’s anyone’s guess at this point, but it would create a dilemma for at least a few top-level politicos.

It all makes me wonder if there’s more to this story; for instance, is Symington’s announcement a ploy to get Brewer to bow out? And, if so, is Symington really the most viable GOP candidate? I’ve been trying to figure out who benefits most from a Brewer withdrawal.

Lastly, Symington won a narrow victory over Democrat Terry Goddard in his first bid for governor in 1990. If he runs again next year and if he wins the primary, Arizonans likely will be in store for a very interesting race that certainly would conjure bits of state history.

For the full interview with Symington and more details, go to http://www.yellowsheetreport.com/home.htm/page/newsArticle.newsArticle&articleID=7260

A new poll was released today (Aug. 31), and the results don’t bode well for Gov. Jan Brewer’s chances for election to a full term. It also looks bad for the Arizona Legislature.

Apparently, voters are fed up with Brewer and state lawmakers – Brewer especially. Only 18 percent of those surveyed said they would vote for Brewer, while 46 percent said they would vote for “someone else.” Thirty-six percent said they were undecided.

It appears Brewer will have to change a lot of people’s minds between now and next fall if she wants to retain the Ninth Floor. Even among Republicans, Brewer didn’t fare well; only 23 percent of GOP voters said they would vote for her, indicating she will have considerable difficulty in a primary election.

Granted, Brewer has only said she is leaning toward running for a full term. But that’s as definitive as she’s been so far. Until last week, her plans for next year were even murkier.

Her proposed sales tax increase did much better than she did, however, with 49 percent saying they approve of the plan. Forty-three percent said they disapprove, which leaves 8 percent on the fence. Democrats were largely in favor of the sales tax increase.

Perhaps more importantly, 57 percent of the respondents said the state is on the wrong track. Only 18 percent thought the state is headed in the right direction.

The Legislature also received poor marks. Sixty-one percent said lawmakers’ performance was not to their liking. Twenty percent said the Legislature was doing a good job.

The top concerns among those polled were public education funding, followed by illegal immigration and the state budget. University funding, the environment and transportation were among the least of their concerns.

The poll was commissioned by Wil Cardon of the real estate firm The Cardon Group, and was publicized by Rose and Allyn Public Relations. The Phoenix-based Summit Group surveyed 602 “high-efficacy Arizona voters” on Aug. 20-25. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percent.

Forty percent of the respondents were Republicans, 33 percent were Democrats and the rest were independent or unaffiliated.

It’s notable that the media release that accompanied the poll results noted that Mr. Cardon has been named as a potential candidate for governor, treasurer and Arizona Republican Party Chairman. Sounds like someone is trying to instigate a revolt.

To view the results of the survey, go to

http://azcapitoltimes.com/wp-files/pdfs/statewide-issues-poll.pdf

It’s extremely unlikely that Gov. Jan Brewer will sign all of the budget bills that the Legislature sent to her Aug. 20. She has nothing to gain and everything to lose by allowing this budget to stand.

After pushing for a sales tax increase for months and vetoing a budget that didn’t include a ballot referral for the increase, Brewer has already run cross-wise with many Republicans who she would be counting on if she decides to seek a full term in 2010. Backing down now would only make her look wishy-washy.

In fact, if she signs the whole package, people would wonder why she put the state through so much trauma by vetoing a budget, which is very similar to the one on her desk now, back on July 1.

What do I mean by trauma? Well, there are plenty of examples. For instance, lawmakers have been tied up in knots for almost two months in a special session to address her concerns over the first set of bills, the state is teetering on the brink of insolvency, state cash tied up in investments has been yanked to cover operating expenses, and Treasurer Dean Martin has been crowing about the very likely possibility that the state will have to borrow money from the private sector (including interest upon repayment) to make up for the lack of a spending plan.

Not only that, but she may have irreparably damaged her image and her chances of being elected next year by continuing to fight with the very Republicans who heralded her ascension to the Ninth Floor.

If she was going to back off her sales tax increase, now would not be the ideal time. She would be seen as having a lack of resolve – voters aren’t real keen on state officials who get beat into submission by their rivals. And fiscal conservatives aren’t about to forgive her for months of pushing for a sales tax increase.

Ideology aside, she has to continue to demand a tax increase. If not the sales tax referral, then something else that would allow her to save face.

She can’t do that if she signs the budget bills as they stand now. Therefore, she is likely to sign the ones that aren’t too controversial – H2014 already has been signed, and others might follow – but veto everything that lawmakers hold dear until they give her what she wants. The repeal of the equalization property tax is one of those bills that might be held hostage while she presses for a tax increase, but it’s not the only one.

She needs leverage. Period.

Let’s say Brewer really doesn’t care about her own political future, and that she is telling the truth when she says she’s trying to do what’s best for the state. Even under that scenario, she would have no incentive to back down now – after all, if she believes the state needs a sales tax increase, then allowing a budget to pass without one would, following her own logic, present even more problems for the state.

If she believes that, then she will have to keep on keeping on.

Bottom line: This mess is probably going to continue for another week or so. At least.

Incidentally, Arizona is one of three states without a fiscal 2010 budget. Connecticut and Pennsylvania are the other two. Even California, which some people see as the poster child of bad fiscal management, was able to pass something.

I’ve already postponed my vacation plans until the end of September. At this rate, perhaps I should just cancel them altogether.

Don’t expect the budget to gain much traction this week – at least not the version passed by the House that includes a mix of income tax cuts, a 5 percent reduction in the state work force and a ballot referral for a sales tax increase.

We hear it’s a no-go in the Senate, where Pamela Gorman and Ron Gould are holding out because of the tax referral and Carolyn Allen is holding out because of the tax cut. Allen stayed away from the Capitol last week because of knee injury that might require surgery, but she told us she is opposed to the budget plan and won’t vote for the proposed $400 million income tax cut.

None of those three are likely to change their minds. Gould ain’t voting for it; he just keeps getting more and more opposed to taxes as each day passes, saying last week that he’ll never vote for a tax increase. Gorman likely won’t vote for it; she already spent hours getting cajoled by the governor, but nothing came of it. And Allen voted against some of the budget bills, even before the income tax reduction was added, so she’s likely to stand firm as well.

Sen. Jim Waring is out of town, but he said he’d come back if his vote was needed to pass the budget. So, we’re counting him as a “yes,” though technically he’s absent.

Same goes for Senate Majority Leader Chuck Gray, who is on a cruise but is expected to be ready to fly back to cast his vote if necessary.

That leaves 15 votes in the Senate, one short of the number needed to pass the 10 budget bills. That’s the same math that stalled the budget’s passage last week. It’s likely to do the same this week, unless a new round of negotiations begins.

Because no action is likely this week on the existing proposal, GOP leaders might opt to go back to the drawing board with Democrats to see if they can craft something with bipartisan approval that is strong enough to override a governor’s veto.

The only other option, besides continuing to pound on the three Senate Republicans, would be to try to peel off a Democrat. Janet Napolitano was masterful at finding a Republican vote or two when she needed them, but it remains to be seen if Brewer has the same skills or cache.