While others prefer to be diplomatic, Sen. Ken Cheuvront speaks his mind without sugarcoating it. When Janet Napolitano resigned her post as governor early this year to become President Obama’s secretary of Homeland Security, the Phoenix lawmaker was quite blunt in his criticism of her decision. “Janet always does what’s good for Janet,” he said. Cheuvront is a shrewd strategist. Last year, he and Sen. Paula Aboud nearly derailed passage of the marriage amendment by starting a filibuster on the Senate floor when nobody saw it coming – during a seemingly harmless discussion on taxes just before the Committee of the Whole debate on the controversial ballot referral.

Their filibuster was cut short, literally, when another senator who was chairing the session turned off their microphones. Over the years Cheuvront has worked extensively on the Government Property Lease Excise Tax, a local excise tax based on the square footage of a building rather than on its value and is levied on businesses that lease the property of a political entity. The Democrat, who owns a construction company and a Phoenix restaurant, said the system is inherently unfair. His efforts were stymied this year, and he has vowed to continue the fight in court. Cheuvront, a veteran lawmaker, will be leaving the Legislature after he is termed-out next year.

I understand you are not seeking [election] next year to any office?
No, it’s not true. I have an exploratory committee for Justice of the Peace in the Encanto District.

Why JP?
Versus what?

Versus Corp Comm or who knows what – city council?
Well, there are no city council races. I have been elected in office now for – it will be 16 years – in the minority for 16 years, and I fought bad legislation for most of that 16 years and, you know, I wanted to be in a position where I’m actually doing something I think is good and having the power to make people’s lives better or make them responsible for their actions…

After 16 years, I have no desire to go back to the House. And after really last year, which was a very negative experience, you know, staying at the Legislature just wasn’t anything I wanted to do and running for a statewide office again was not something that I found particularly appealing.

Your friendship with former Senator Karen Johnson is legendary, given her views on homosexuality, among other things. Can you tell me how she became a really good friend of yours?
She is just a good person. I mean she’s just really a good person and I think the difference is after last year, I find very few of those left in the Senate on the Republican side – people who I would really want to spend time with, and that is unfortunate because most of my time in the Senate was very positive until last year. Karen, on the other hand, even though we disagree on things, she had a heart of gold and she really meant well and she was just an all-around good person.

Some of her ideas were wacky and she’s the first person to admit that. But she was open to building a friendship and that is everything.

We expected Senator Johnson to vote for the marriage amendment last year because she has always been in support of that particular issue. But when she did, did it strain your friendship?
No – because we had talked about it and she didn’t agree with it. But she felt that her constituents did.

The filibuster that you did, the attempt that you did, was clever because if I recall it right, you began it in the COW [Committee of the Whole debate] just before the COW on the marriage amendment, which I think no one saw coming…
Well, in order to be successful you have to be clever and you have to take people off guard. We would have been successful had [Sen. Jack] Harper not broken the rules. You cannot – and I have never in my tenure down here ever seen somebody cut off the mikes and that he was not held accountable for his actions to me just made me realize that I had very little respect left for this institution.

When you said you would have been successful, was it in terms of delaying it or derailing it completely?
We would have been talking until midnight. I would have assumed at some point, they would have closed down. I could have spoken, you know, for days. And at some point, I would assume that I would have worn them down because obviously it was an issue extremely important to both Paula and me.

You did have a hearing and I think you had a chance to speak. He [Harper] had the chance to speak.
And I got to give him credit that he was extremely honest. He admitted that he shut off the mikes because he wanted to stop debate. And looking at the expressions of some of the people like Senator (Barbara) Leff, I mean, they were aghast. But they allowed politics to get in the way of, you know, properly punishing somebody who did something wrong. And even (Jay) Tibshraeny – his office was going to be taken away from him because he allowed the hearing to go forward.

Wait – you said there was a threat (against Tibshraeny)?
Oh, yeah. Senator (Pamela) Gorman had threatened to take his office away from him and he only held on to it because he fought.

Some blame the attempted filibuster as a reason for the kind of debate limitation that we saw this session.
No, no. That is not true because we limited debate before that. I was not the first person to filibuster. It was Harper and Gould who started it and we limited debate at that point. But nobody limited the debate prior to that and in my 15 years, I never had that kind of issue that was so important to me. Again – and that could be the reason why they limited debate. It didn’t matter to me – but the point was we were within the rules at the time we were having that conversation or (when) we were having that debate.

Senator Huppenthal said he saw a “fracturing” of the filibuster tradition during the marriage-amendment debate last year. He said, “It almost seemed like it finished off the filibuster as a working tool to help mediate severe disputes.” What do you think of his comments?
(Laughs) I don’t understand it. I mean, again, we were within our right. We had, the night before, listened to Gould and Harper and nobody turned off their microphones. So by bringing out this amendment, the very last bill of the session, created the problem. Not me.

This year the Legislature decided to strip essentially the health benefits of domestic partners of state workers, although officials I think recently said it will be extended to 12 months because [otherwise] they will be violating contracts. Are you personally affected by this change [in the definition of dependent]?
No. I am personally offended by the change because I think it was mean-spirited and by going after gays and lesbians, they hurt children and many others who were affected by it.

What kind of perspective does being a business owner give you and how different is this perspective from the rest of your colleagues here in the Senate?
I think it gives me an opportunity to help work with my caucus in giving a different perspective on business issues. I think the Democratic caucus has gone a long way in the last six years of being more responsive to the business community, where the Republican Party, on the other hand, has gone so extreme that much of their legislation is anti-business, whether it is stripping the money from the Arizona Science Foundation…, taking money from the universities, which are highly needed in order for us to be able to be competitive with other states. So, you know, the list goes on and on of just [their] being so far out there that I would assume the business community in the next election will step up and be more careful who they support.

You’re saying that while your caucus has been, in a way, moving to the center, the GOP caucus has been moving more and more to the right?
Yeah, I mean they have moved so far to the right that a lot of their beliefs are not pro-business at all, whether it has to do with immigration, or whether it does with taxes or with investment in education. You know, as a business person, they are anathema to me. I can’t afford to educate my staff or my employees.

It is a very expensive endeavor and when you cut back on universities and public education, you hurt everyone.

What do you think of Jan Brewer’s chances of winning in a primary in her own party after what happened this year?
Nil to none and it is unfortunate because I got to say I gained a lot of respect for Jan this year. I think she did the right thing the wrong way.

What would have been the right way for this right thing?
Ultimately, it was about communication. She should have had a budget early on. She has an incredible staff up there that was doing that. And instead of being strong, she was perceived as weak and so she didn’t have really respect of anybody down here. She is my fourth governor I’ve worked with down here, and you’ve got to trust your staff but the staff has to also be very tough with the legislators. And I think the thing she did was completely right, you know, in her vetoes, in what she tried to accomplish. But the way she did it – I mean she should have never allowed any bills to go into effect. She should have vetoed them all until she got what she wanted. And she has been around the political process long enough to know how to do things. So I was disappointed. Instead of really getting the right things done the right way, she probably hurt her political career in the future.

The impression is that the state is changing. Demographics are changing. There are more Democrats now as the latest registration roll shows. Do you think that in the next few election cycles, you would have a Democratic majority and a Democratic governor? And how soon do
you think that would happen?
It depends. The state is changing drastically. We are becoming a state where the independents are really going to decide the elections of the future. You know, we already saw in the last election, even though the legislative candidates didn’t do well, we now have a majority of the congressional delegation. Two out of the three statewide offices that were up for election went to Democrats. So I think the Democrats will do well in the future, but because many of the districts are so gerrymandered for one party or the other, at this point, it would be difficult for the Democrats to take control. With the new redistricting, we will see what happens.

Sixteen years of lawmaking – what would you advise freshmen lawmakers?
Listen and don’t talk. That’s the biggest. Have integrity and be honest because your word is everything. Once you lie or, you know, you lead people down the wrong path your reputation will be with you for the rest of your career.

Thanks again for your time.
Welcome. Good luck.

UpCloser…

Do you allow guns in your restaurant?
No.

So, you’ve put up a sign?
I did.

How much did it cost you?
Nothing.

What is the process like?
I just went down to the Liquor Department and asked for some signs and they gave them to me. It doesn’t cost to have that sign.

Have you seen any increase or decrease in traffic since the sign was put up or it is too early to tell?
Having the sign up is not going to have an impact on my restaurant. The only thing I’ve had is people coming in and saying, “I’m eating here because you had the sign up. I wouldn’t eat otherwise.”

Oh, is that true?
Yeah. I got e-mails from gun rights activists saying, “I’m never going to come to your restaurant again. You know, I like the burrito I had last time.” But we’ve never even served burritos so it was people who have never been to the restaurant, never would come to the restaurant.

And like my colleagues said: How do I know those people who have concealed weapons are good shots? You know, do we want them shooting in my restaurant to save themselves and they kill three of my waiters? No.