Sign In
Free Newsletter
Health insurance reform is not a new idea
Sides have been chosen in the national fight to reform health insurance. The New York Times called it "a battle between individualism and socialization in medicine which promises to be of long duration." Long duration is right.
Brewer’s tax hike a recipe for bankruptcy
Several otherwise conservative legislators are thinking very hard about capitulating to Gov. Jan Brewer's scheme to put on the ballot an 18-percent increase in Arizona's sales tax rate. Those legislators have argued they could wring more spending reductions out of the governor by allowing the sales tax referendum to go to the ballot.
Allow racinos to balance budget
It's against a distressing fiscal backdrop that the subject of the Arizona's gaming policy has come due for review. Briefly expressed, that policy holds that some number of the state's Native American tribes shall be allowed indefinitely to reap billions of dollars from gambling receipts, and everyone else shall reap precious little.
Don’t bully Arizona
President Obama should immediately rebuke the members of his Cabinet who are threatening the State of Arizona over stimulus money as a result of U.S. Senator Jon Kyl's declaration that stimulus spending should be halted and redirected to more worthwhile purposes such as health care.
No room in U.S. Supreme Court for empathy-based rulings
The United States Senate has held a confirmation hearing for Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court. As the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, I had pledged that the hearing will be fair and respectful - but also thorough and rigorous.
Don’t let K-12 education get caught in budget crossfire
Our governor and our Legislature seem to be headed to a showdown at the O.K. Corral next Tuesday (June 30) over the budget. Hopefully, Arizona's K-12 students won't get caught in the crossfire. Continued cuts to education will only dim prospects for Arizona's future leaders and all of today's children who will contribute to our state's economy.
Clean Elections system represents democracy at work
Arizona voters adopted the Clean Elections system of funding elections to increase public participation in government in a number of ways — to increase the number of candidates running for office, to increase the number of citizens involved in campaigns and to increase discussion of the issues.
Brewer’s ballot bargain is bad bet for conservatives
Last week, Gov. Jan Brewer offered the Legislature a new package of ballot proposals that could be sent to Arizona voters in a special election:
Clean Elections needs to be strengthened, improved
On June 5, the Arizona Capitol Times published a letter entitled “Why Clean Elections needs to end now.” The League of Women Voters of Arizona, which was instrumental in writing and achieving the passage of the Clean Elections law and which remains a major supporter of the system, takes issue with opposition to that law. Clean Elections is neither un-American nor unconstitutional.
Critic of Clean Elections benefitted from program
In his Arizona Capitol Times commentary (“Why Clean Elections needs to end now,” June 5), Rep. Rick Murphy calls for the end of Clean Elections in Arizona. Rep. Murphy calls Clean Elections “un-American” and notes that he has been opposed to Clean Elections since it was first proposed. His major complaint is that his participating opponents receive matching funds when he outspends them.
Pullen does disservice to GOP with stance on tax hike
Will the Republican Party remain the low-tax, limited-government party of Ronald Reagan? Or will it abandon its limited-government principles and become the "tax collector for the welfare state," following the Democratic Party around to raise taxes to pay for ever-increasing tax-and-spend government.
Why Clean Elections needs to end now
I have been opposed to the idea of taxpayer-funded campaigns ever since Arizona’s so-called “Clean Elections” plan was first proposed. It is simply un-American that the government decides who gets money for political speech and that the funds come from hardworking taxpayers who may or may not support the views expressed.
