State Legislature

Your government budget

Something to ponder when you hear about public employee pensions and the state or local government budget.

Like it or not the Arizona Legislature put a hot issue into play that both parties would rather have sidestepped going into 2010. The controversial SB1070 immigration law enacted in Arizona set off a firestorms of debate around the county.  The State of Arizona has been frustrated by inaction from the feds on immigration policy  which caused stresses on law enforcement, emergency rooms and social service programs.  Looks like a bunch of other states are starting to follow suit. What will the Obama Administration do?

Nearly Half of United States Considering Arizona-Style Immigration Legislation
Thursday, August 19, 2010
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer

 

In this June 15, 2010 file photo, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer speaks in Phoenix. With the scrawl of a pen, Brewer awakened a dormant - but politically explosive - issue of illegal immigration, sending shock waves across the political spectrum in an election year when both parties had hoped to sidestep the topic. (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin, File)

(CNSNews.com) – Twenty-two states are now in the process of drafting or seeking to pass legislation similar to Arizona’s law against illegal immigration. This is occurring despite the fact that the Obama administration has filed a lawsuit against the Arizona law and a federal judge has ruled against portions of that law – a ruling that is now being appealed.
 
Next month, two Rhode Island state lawmakers, a Democrat and a Republican, will travel to Arizona to speak with Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, local sheriffs, and other officials about how to better craft their own bipartisan immigration bill for Rhode Island, which already has been enforcing some federal immigration laws.
 
Meanwhile, 11 Republican state lawmakers from Colorado traveled to Arizona this week to meet with officials there on how to craft legislation for the Mile High state. 
 
In addition, Alabama House Republicans announced this week that they would seek to “push an illegal immigration bill similar to the recently approved Arizona law.” This law would “create a new criminal trespass statute that allows local law enforcement to arrest illegal immigrants for simply setting foot in Alabama,” said Alabama’s House Minority Leader Mike Hubbard.
 
In Florida, proposed legislation against illegal immigration has been retooled to address some concerns raised by a federal judge who blocked the proposed bill, though it would still allow Florida state police to enforce immigration law.
 
In all, there are 22 states considering copycat legislation from the Arizona law against illegal immigration, according to the Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee (ALIPAC), a group that advocates for stricter immigration enforcement.

 

 

These illegal immigrants, deported to Mexico on Wednesday, July 28, 2010, are shown near the Nogales Port of Entry in Sonora, Mexico. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)

Arizona’s law mirrors federal law. It requires local law enforcement officers during a lawful stop to determine the immigration status of an individual by asking the person to show identification that residents are already required to carry by law; and it authorizes law enforcement to securely transfer verified illegal aliens to federal custody.
 
The law prohibits racial profiling and gives state residents the right to sue local agencies for not complying with the state law.
 
In the lawsuit challenging the Arizona law, the Obama administration said the United States should not have a “patchwork” of 50 different immigration laws. In late July, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton ruled against most of the major elements of the Arizona law, halting their implementation.  That ruling is now in the appeals process.
 
“We do not expand on federal law,” Florida state Rep. William Snyder, the sponsor of the bill in his state, told CNSNews.com. “We do not change penalties. The goal is not to create a new immigration framework at the state level.”
 
Snyder, the chairman of the Florida House Criminal Justice Committee, said his staff attorneys have taken the decision by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton into consideration in re-crafting their bill for the next state legislative session.

By Joe Higgins and Chris DeSimone, Inside Tucson Business
Published on Friday, August 13th, 2010

Read a newspaper, turn on the TV news or listen to the radio and you start hearing the same buzz words over and over from local power brokers and politicians. They’ve been using them so long, you can’t help but notice they don’t add up.

At the suggestion of listeners to our radio show, we’ve put together our Wake Up, Tucson dictionary of definitions to these common buzzwords and phrases.

• Transparency or accountability.
Implied meaning: As stewards of taxpayers’ hard-earned dollars, governments constantly strive to expose insider or backroom deals and honestly report the financial impacts of decisions.   Print this storyEmail this storyPost a CommentShareThis
 
Real meaning: We will do fancy multimedia presentations with beautiful photos of things like folklorico dancers, but never actually show you anything important. We hire consultants to justify decisions we already know we are going to make. Pima County government has an additional meaning: If you are a county employee and your name appears in the news media, clean out your desk.

• The half-cent additional city sales tax is for cops and fire.
Implied meaning: The tax on the Nov. 2 ballot will go to funding necessary basic city services.

Real meaning: We will throw the money at fire and cops; meanwhile we’ll continue using city money to subsidize $5 yoga classes and Sun Tran services. If the new tax were really for cops and fire, why would Councilwoman Regina Romero have told Sun Tran’s striking Teamsters to “wait until the new sales tax is passed” when the city has more money in the kitty.

• Public-private partnership.
Implied meaning: A symbiotic relationship between a government and private businesses that will bear mutually beneficial economic fruit.

Real meaning: The business model is so bad that no private business would dream of sinking its own money into it. (Think downtown Tucson convention hotel.)

• Think outside the box.
Implied meaning: We are a cutting-edge organization constantly looking outside the norms of the typical boring way of thinking.

Real meaning: We can’t come up with an original thought and besides, any idea that does come up never gets implemented so we have to say something like this to make it look like we might actually do something some day.

• Blue ribbon panel.
Implied meaning: We have gathered the area’s brightest stakeholders to solicit ideas, debate them and present the resulting solutions in a clear, concise manner.

Real meaning: The place where good ideas go to die.

• Regionalism.
Implied meaning: A broad-based and inclusive partnership of municipalities working together to achieve a common goal by realizing the economies of scale and complimenting each of the other’s strengths and weaknesses.

Real meaning: A super government put into place by Pima County with the City of Tucson supposedly an equal. The goal is that once total control of water and wastewater is complete, the “region” can start to be turned back to the way it was in the 1940s. Meanwhile, the battle rages on the outskirts where the real region’s last hopes for progress lie in the the municipalities of Marana, Oro Valley and Sahuarita. (Bring up the “Star Wars” theme music.)

• Small business day (as proclaimed by the Tucson city council leading up to the November 2009 election).
Implied meaning:  The attitude of the city and it’s bureaucratic red tape is improving so much, it’s a snap to open a business in Tucson. Things are “shovel-ready” and ready to go.

Real meaning: The city needs revenue so it has come up with a bunch of new fees to nickel-and-dime you when you try to open a small business. As an example, how about the city’s new $5,000 non-refundable application fee for temporary revocable easement review? In Oro Valley,a full Development Review Board review is $350.

• It’s for the children.
Implied meaning: The increased taxes and fees government is proposing on businesses will go to programs that will benefit the most vulnerable members of our society.

Real meaning: The extra money will go to politicians’ pet projects to increase reliance on government by the most vulnerable in our society, thus helping to reassure politicians’ re-election.

There are others we can’t fit in this column, such as “the four-mile $160 million modern streetcar will spur development;” “we have to build a downtown convention center hotel to save the annual gem shows;” “the $200 million spent so far by Rio Nuevo on downtown redevelopment sets the stage for private investment;” “spending $46 million on a $31 million downtown underpass is a great deal;” “I support copper mining but I’m concerned about how much water Rosemont Copper will use;” “the orange griffen and Scott Avenue is the heartbeat of downtown Tucson;” and “Huntsville, Ala., has nothing on Tucson.”

There are more buzzwords out there and we’d like to hear them. Send us your suggestions at the e-mail address below.

Consider it an educational as well as fun exercise. This stuff would be funny if it weren’t so painfully true.

Contact Joe Higgins and Chris DeSimone at wakeuptucson@gmail.com. They host “Wake Up Tucson,” 6-8 a.m. weekdays on The Voice KVOI 1030-AM. Their blog is at www.TucsonChoices.com.

Now Arizona Game and Fish have to weigh in on the impact on wind turbines on birds?  How would you like that job?  I’m wondering if birds aren’t smart enough to fly around the 10 story wind turbines?

New wildlife guidelines approved
Posted - 7/8/2010 at 7:34AM- From KVOA.com
PHOENIX (AP) - The Arizona Game and Fish Department has issued new guidelines aimed at helping energy developers protect the state’s wildlife.
The department says wind turbines threaten birds and bats who fly near the blades, and solar facilities could block or reroute surface water flows.
The guidelines include assessing biological resources, conducting site screenings, and identifying and mitigating impacts to wildlife.
The department says the destruction or loss of habitat is the leading cause of species extinction.
Josh Avey of Game and Fish says the department supports the development of renewable energy but wants to make sure that developers consider wildlife early in the planning phase.
Please fill out your name, the recipients e-mail address and a custom message for your recipient. Re-submit the form for multiple recipients.

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

Last year, Hollywood’s largest prop house, 20th Century Props, closed after 40 years in business and auctioned off 93,000 props from films such as “Titanic” and television shows like “The X Files.” The owner said businesses had slowed because productions were leaving Hollywood for states like New Mexico and Louisiana that offer tax incentives.

In 2008, when FilmMaker Production Services opened, there were 38 film and television productions shot in New Mexico. That rose to 41 in 2009. For the year to date in 2010, there are about 15 productions listed at the New Mexico Film Office website.

Eric Witt, media industries liaison to Gov. Bill Richardson, said production levels are strong in the state. There are five films and television shows filming, including the third season of “In Plain Sight” and “Scoundrels,” as well as Disney production “Lemonade Mouth.” All three are shooting in Albuquerque.

“Cowboys & Aliens,” starring Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford, is shooting in Santa Fe.

There has been pressure on budgets in the film industry, Witt said, especially at the studio level, but that has not necessarily translated into fewer productions.

Lisa Strout, director of the New Mexico Film Office, said FilmMaker Production Services is the only large-scale, commercial prop house in the state and will be sorely missed. But she added that production levels in the state have gone up over the past several months.

“I think there is a difference between not enough production and not enough production coming to the prop house, for whatever reason,” Strout said.

For a prop house focused primarily on contemporary goods, factors such as the type of productions, their budgets and the time period in which they are set can also impact business, she added.

“We have gone through yet another resurgence of period Westerns of late, as well as futuristic films that design and create props specifically for their unique look,” Strout said.

Ann Lerner, director of the city of Albuquerque’s film office, said FilmMaker Production Services has been a good partner in the community, hosting meetings and fundraisers.

“We’ll miss their presence here,” she said.

NBC Universal does have another company here, New Mexico Lighting & Grip Co., located at Albuquerque Studios.

Read more: Albuquerque’s FilmMaker Production Services closing - New Mexico Business Weekly

HERE - immigration, La Raza, guns and federalism v. states rights…

Why You’re Paying Higher Taxes

Published on May 14, 2010 by James Sherk

Wondering why you paid so much in taxes on April 15? The answer lies in Oregon.

In January, labor unions in that state campaigned for two ballot initiatives hiking income and business taxes. They argued that businesses needed to pay their “fair share.” Businesses fought the measures, but unions outspent them 3-to-2, and the measures passed easily.

This seems odd. Like most Americans, union members don’t especially like paying taxes. Indeed, the labor movement went to bat to exempt its members from the tax increases in President Obama’s health plan. So why would unions press for higher taxes in Oregon? Because unions representing government workers funded the campaign. The more the government taxes, the more it can pay its unionized workers.

State employees in Oregon don’t contribute toward the cost of their health plans - and they want it to stay that way. So public sector unions in Oregon went all out for higher taxes to forestall spending cuts. Unfortunately this is the new face of Organized Labor across the United States. The market competition that has bankrupted unionized companies such as General Motors doesn’t exist for government. No matter how much unions raise costs, the government (almost always) stays in business. So even as private-sector unions have shed members, public-sector unions have added them.

Last year those paths crossed: a majority of union members nationwide now work for the government. Three times as many union members work for the Post Office as in the auto industry. The union movement’s priorities have shifted with their membership.

Unions once put their energy into improving private-sector working conditions, such as banning child labor and workplace safety laws. Now unions focus on making government employment even more comfortable. Have they ever. The average state and local employee earns $40 an hour in compensation, well above the $27 an hour made by the private-sector workers whose taxes fund their pay.

Much of this generous compensation comes not in cash wages but in benefits. The average government employee earns triple the retirement contributions of the average private-sector worker and can retire far earlier. Government employees get generous health benefits too. Almost one out of every four local government employees pay nothing out of pocket for health care. How many private-sector workers get that?

Government workers have also been insulated from the pain of the recession. The government has been hiring even as the private sector lost 8 million jobs over the last two years. No wonder government employees are more likely than anyone else to tell pollsters that their personal finances are doing well.

Understandably, government employee unions like these arrangements. But the money that makes it all possible comes from your taxes - and that explains why the union movement has become an aggressive lobby for higher taxes all across America.

The labor movement’s love for taxes is not unique to Oregon. In Arizona, government unions successfully lobbied for a $250 million property tax increase. In Minnesota, unions narrowly failed in passing a $1 billion tax hike. In Illinois they are trying to hike the state income tax by 66 percent. The list of union backed tax-increase campaigns goes on and on.

Instead of voters telling the government how to spend their money, government unions now tell voters the taxes they want them to pay. They always have a one-word answer: more.

As taxpayers in Oregon recently discovered, the new labor movement wants you to pay your “fair share” - to them.

James Sherk is a senior policy analyst in labor economics at The Heritage Foundation.

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt