Another reason for Baja Arizona: The Arizona Daily Star would have no excuse not to cover news at the Capitol

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Arizona Daily Star has not assigned a reporter to cover goings on at the Capitol since Daniel Scarpinato left for a brief stint at the Arizona Capitol Times while waiting for his dream job of being communications director for Congressman Jonathan "Payday" Paton. (He was pretty much writing press releases for Paton disguised as reporting when he was working for the Star). Ah, shattered dreams.

The state's second largest newspaper does not care enough to assign a reporter to the Capitol. It's not like it can't afford it — have you seen all the advertising that Jim Click has been buying over the past several months? That should cover the per diem and gas money.

The Star, like almost every other small town newspaper in Arizona, relies upon Capitol reporting from Capitol Media Services, i.e., Howard Fischer, and the occasional AP report produced by The Arizona Republic or East Valley Tribune.

Capitol Media Services has a near monopoly on the news readers of small town newspapers in Arizona who do not receive The Arizona Republic have available to read. This is wrong. The Founding Fathers intended a vibrant media with multiple eyes and ears watching government and expressing a wide array of opinions, not just Howard Fischer's (no offense intended, Howard).

By the way, Blog for Arizona does have a reporter at the Capitol, the brilliant and dedicated Craig McDermott.

So — if Southern Arizona were to become the 51st State of "Baja Arizona," the city of Tucson, its largest city, would become the Capitol city. And the Arizona Daily Star would have no excuse not to cover the news at the Capitol. Of course, this does not address the quality of its reporting.

Here is a summary of what happened yesterday at the Capitol in Phoenix from The Arizona Republic, since you did not read it in today's Star. Arizona lawmakers OK'd 'Tea party' plate, gun bills:

The Arizona Senate on Tuesday…voted down a proposal to allow the Legislature to decide which federal laws Arizona would follow and which it would not. [More on this from the Arizona Capitol Times Senate kills state ‘nullification’ bill again.]

The bills that passed now go to the House for consideration. Here is a summary of some of those bills:

– Senate Bill 1402: Would allow for the creation of a "Don't Tread on Me" state license plate. Donations would cover the $32,000 start-up fee and proceeds would go to organizations that "promote tea party governing principles."

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Phoenix, opposed the measure, saying it would be the first – out of more than 80 state plates – to be for a political entity instead of a charitable group.

* * *

Senate President Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, said it is not a political plate because the "tea party" is not a political party.

Pearce is correct. The Tea Party is a corporate front group funded by the billionaire bastard Koch brothers who can afford to pay into this slush fund for the use of Sen. Pearce and Rep. Adams to dole out to their Tea Party supporters. Take a closer look at this bill.

And by the way "Mr. Constitutional law expert," if you allow one political group to have its own specialty license plate, you have to allow them all to have one under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, and political free speech under the 1st Amendment. This means the Socialist Party, the Communist Party, the Nazi Party, etc. will soon be applying for their own specialty license plates. See what happens when you set a precedent like this?

-SB 1610: Would make the Colt Single Action Army Revolver the state firearm.

Sen. Adam Driggs, R-Phoenix, opposed the bill, saying it is essentially giving naming rights to a commercial enterprise.

"The fact that a lobbyist for Colt actually lobbied for this further exemplifies that this is an advertisement for Colt," he said. "If the state is going to go in this direction, we should get the equivalent of naming rights and get some funds to draw down the general fund."

Damn straight! If you want to run government like a business, then at least get a long-term naming rights agreement and make some money off it. These guys suck at running a business.

– SB 1329: Prohibits a public employee from lobbying a governmental entity during their work hours.

Sen. Frank Antenori, R-Tucson, supported the bill.

"It doesn't prohibit free speech," he said. "It just says if you want to send an e-mail, do it from your own computer. If you want to come up here and visit your legislator, take the day off."

Secret decoder: What this really means is that public employees cannot do what they are doing in Wisconsin right now, exercising their 1st Amendment rights of political free speech to petition their government on legislative matters affecting them personally. No walk outs or sick outs on scheduled work time to come to the Capitol to lobby legislators. This is an anti-union measure that affects all public employees.

– SB 1188: Requires the state and private adoption agencies to give primary consideration to married couples when considering adoption placements.

Sen. Leah Landrum Taylor, D-Phoenix, opposed the bill, saying it will discourage singles from considering adoption in Arizona. She said the Legislature should be working on measures to speed up the state's adoption process.

Pearce supported the bill, saying "This simply gives preference," he said. "All the evidence is clear that children do better in a two-parent home."

And since Arizona does not recognize gay marriage or civil unions, this precludes single or married gays from adopting children, the real purpose behind this bill.

– SB 1159: Revives the tax-credit program for companies that film movies in Arizona. The credit can be up to $15 million per movie but is only applied if up to half of the full-time employees are Arizona residents. The bill also offers an additional financial incentive for using an Arizona studio.

This measure passed with support from the Democrats and opposition from several of the more conservative Republicans.

Here is another bill not covered in this Arizona Republic summary but was reported by Howard Fischer. Plan lets taxpayers to divert more of what they owe in taxes to private schools – East Valley Tribune:

State senators voted Tuesday to let Arizonans divert even more of what they owe in taxes to instead help send children to private and parochial schools.

And they rejected anything to link that help to family income.

The voice vote came over the objections of some Democrats who questioned the idea of taking funds that would otherwise wind up in the state treasury and instead use them to pay tuition and fees at these private schools.

* * *

A 1997 law allows Arizonans to get a dollar-for-dollar credit on what they owe the state in income taxes for money they donate to organizations which provide the scholarships for private and parochial schools.

Individuals have been able to divert up to $500 a year or double that for couples. In the 2009 tax year — the most recent numbers available — Arizonans diverted more than $50.8 million in individual income taxes to the scholarship organizations.

SB 1312 would boost the allowable credit to $750, again, with twice that amount for married couples.

Senate Minority Leader David Schapira, D-Tempe, said the system hardly amounts to charitable contributions.

First, he noted, every dollar provided comes back to the donor in a tax refund. And second, the law permits donors to make "recommendations'' to scholarship organizations on which student should benefit, though the group is not legally obligated to honor that request.

"If you have a friend whose kid wants some money, and you write them a check and get the money back, that's not charity,'' Schapira said. "It's a loan.''

Schapira said if the state insists on keeping the program — and even expanding it — there should be some limits. He proposed a new requirement that allows the funds to go only to those who meet certain income requirements.

* * *

Murphy objected, saying he sees no problem with providing the help even to those who are "well off'' so they can send their children to private or parochial schools.

"The taxpayers already pay for all of the education dollars for lots and lots of rich families,'' he said. "They do it through the public school system. And there's no reason that we should differentiate in this particular case.''

* * *

Murphy acknowledged that some of the students who get these scholarships are students whose parents would send them go to private or parochial school anyway. But he said that the program saves money even if only half the youngsters who get the help moved from public schools.

The measure needs a final roll-call vote before going to the House.

The "private and parochial school" tax credit is still before the U.S. Supreme Court awaiting a decision. Arizona's tuition tax credit debated at U.S. Supreme Court. It violates the Arizona Constitution, Article 11, Section 7 Sectarian instruction; religious or political test or qualification:

No sectarian instruction shall be imparted in any school or state educational institution that may be established under this Constitution, and no religious or political test or qualification shall ever be required as a condition of admission into any public educational institution of the state, as teacher, student, or pupil; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be so construed as to justify practices or conduct inconsistent with the good order, peace, morality, or safety of the state, or with the rights of others.

You can't make it any clearer than this, but I'm sure Justices Thomas and Scalia will find a way to render null and void this express prohibition in the Arizona Constitution. Judicial activism — IOKIYAR.