Quantcast
Home / Election 2014 / Pearce allies exploring 11th-hour push to reimburse him for recall election

Pearce allies exploring 11th-hour push to reimburse him for recall election

Russell Pearce (file photo)

Allies of ousted senator Russell Pearce aren’t giving up on the idea of reimbursing him for campaign expenses related to his November recall election.

Some Republicans had pushed for the reimbursement of about $260,000 to be included in the state budget.

But the state’s spending plan was adopted Tuesday without such a provision.

Now some lawmakers are considering pushing the legislation in the final days of the 2012 legislative session.

“The big question is, you know, where we put it,” said Sen. Steve Smith, R-Maricopa. “We’re constitutionally bound to do it.”

The Arizona Constitution requires the Legislature to enact laws to govern recalls, “including provision for payment by the public treasury of the reasonable special election campaign expenses of such officer.”

However, the state law that allowed reimbursements for recalls was repealed by the Legislature in 1973.

Senate Majority Leader Andy Biggs, another ally of Pearce, said there is no statutory framework to govern recall elections as the constitution mandates.

He said he’s “exploring” how lawmakers can satisfy this requirement.

“When the Legislature has a constitutional requirement, then I take that seriously and we need to figure out what it means and try to respond accordingly,” the majority leader said.

Earlier, House Speaker Pro Tem Steve Montenegro circulated a letter calling for Pearce’s reimbursement.

“There’s a lot of legislators that have raised the issue,” the Litchfield Park Republican said. “Some members have spoken out, and it’s our constitutional duty.”

But some aren’t sure Pearce deserves to be reimbursed, since none of the money he spent in the recall election was actually his.

“If it came out of Russell’s personal pocket – you know, he and his wife took out a second mortgage (or) something like that – then the conversation is open. But a refund of campaign contributions from groups across the country, from lobbyists and things like that? Absolutely not,” said Sen. Rich Crandall, a Mesa Republican.

Crandall often butted heads with Pearce when the two served together in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. Rather than challenge Pearce this year, Crandall announced that he would move to a neighboring district.

But even Sen. Ron Gould, R-Lake Havasu City, one of Pearce’s ideological allies, said he’s not “keen on giving away taxpayer money.”

“I’m not going to vote for it,” he said. “It’s taxpayer money. I don’t give taxpayer money away to anybody. I don’t want to give taxpayer money to half of the things that we give now.”

Pearce is running again for the Senate this year in the new Legislative District 25. His opponent in the Republican primary is Bob Worsley, the founder of SkyMall.

Until 1973, state law included provisions to reimburse recalled officials: maximums of $500 for statewide officers, $200 for legislators and $150 for municipal officers. However, that law was repealed as part of a sweeping overhaul of the state’s initiative, referendum and recall statutes.

In the historic 2011 recall election, Pearce’s campaign spent $260,302 attempting to retain the Senate seat he had been elected to a year earlier. None of the money was his: Of the $261,000 he raised, more than $180,000 came from individual contributors and another $81,000 came from political action committees.

He was defeated by Republican Jerry Lewis, who spent $84,979. The election was the first time in state history a legislator was successfully recalled.

Pearce told the ~Arizona Capitol Times~ last week that he would give “serious consideration” to accepting the money. He said the Legislature has a duty to offer the money, but he would not say definitively whether he would actually accept it.

4 comments

  1. FORMER SENATOR RUSSELL PEARCE’S BRASS BALLS…
    It takes a set of big brass cojones for former Senator Russell Pearce to expect the taxpayer’s to shell out over $200,000 dollars to pay for his recall election.
    Republican, Pearce Partisans are mounting an effort to have the
    soon-to-be-released budget to cover the $230,000 Recall campaign reimbursed for the expenses incurred by Pearce trying to fight off a recall.

    The Arizona Constitution has language that allows for reimbursement of
    easonable recall expenses. Most believe the Constitution applies only to the individual’s expenses.

    I DESERVE THE MONEY, BUT MAKE MY ENEMIES PAY IT
    Pearcetoday told our reporter that he is considering accepting the money – if it ever comes
    – but is still undecided, though he also said he deserves to be reimbursed. “I have to give it serious consideration. It cost me a lot personally and I had to expend money in order
    to run for an election that I shouldn’t have had to run for it
    at all. So that’s a tough call,” Pearce said. Although taxpayers are constitutionally on the hook for the money, But he really the thinks the citizens who started the recall should pay.

    Which is a bunch of horse poop based on the fact Pearce’s recall campaign was funded by contributions from far and wide. Plus Secretary of State records that have been shows the recall campaign has a $2,500 cash balance.

  2. That section of the Arizona Constitution does NOT necessarily apply to a failed recall. Have you gotten a legal opinion on it?

  3. We will vote against everyone who supports giving ousted senator Russell Pearce a single dollar. He was ousted out of office by his constituents and will work diligently to oust those who support him.

  4. All legislators are running for office and voters will decide whether or not they will be elected. Taxpayer monies and how they are used is a deciding factor in this election. With children impacted by Child Protective Service cuts and a lack of investigation of child sex crimes, plus a need for healthcare for kids and a serious look at the need for education, why would anyone even consider giving tax dollars to Russell Pearce. None of the campaign funds spent on his recall were his, so why are we obligated to give him anything. Biggs, Montenegro and Smith have a serious ideological problem when it concerns Pearce. Who are they loyal to and who do they serve? Voters? Taxpayers? or Russell Pearce? This is a no brainer. Maybe they should not be in office…if they are confused about this issue. Russell Pearce has to think about accepting funds that were not his! Come on folks. Get rid of him…we are weary!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Scroll To Top