There’s still seating in the side room, if you’d like to join.
The “Protect Arizona Taxpayers” initiative is going first. This is the constitutional amendment that would permanently exclude services from taxation.
“Is an app a product or a service?” @kenclarkforaz This amendment would tie the hands of the legislature to address the service economy—but without telling the public how much potential revenue excluded.
Looks like we will not be telling voters the potential revenue this measure excludes in the summary, based on a straight party-line vote.
@OutlawDirty is up next. Said it before, I’ll say it again— this is the most important vote we will have in November.
As an aside, I know that the committee chair gets to pick the order of agenda—but why oh why, when your room is packed with red, does #INVESTinED have to go last?
Also—a big shoutout to the moms with children who are here. Thank you for making democracy a family value!
Lots of talk about whether the summary should define clean or renewable sources and whether the fact that SRP is excluded crosses the line into advocacy.
@CharleneforAZ “I listen to our constituents. I listen to our stakeholders.” Heck yes you do! Thank you!
It's 12:22. We've are only just now on #InvestInEd, despite that there are two full rooms of teachers, administrators, parents, and allies waiting. But please, tell me again how Arizona respects education...
Free cheese in the HHR3!
We are going round and round on whether #INVESTinED includes inflationary adjustments. There is some serious mental gymnastics involved to turn “subject to subsection B, C, and D” into “subject to subsection D only.”
Now we are debating what a “small business” is so that we can tell voters that #INVESTinED will raise their taxes.
Teachers, administrators and allies! Please don’t give leave yet. The amendments have gotten more problematic as the afternoon has gone on.
The worst amendment yet was just offered. The proposal is to tell voters that it is a 70%-90% increase in taxes.
Here’s how the math works— for some earners, the tax rate increases from 4.54% to 8%. Now they want to add summary to state the percentage of the percentage increase.
The tax rate moves from 4.54% to 8%. The amendment wants the summary to state it’s a 76% increase.
I hate that this has a typo. My apologies. Blood sugar was low before the aforementioned cheese distribution.
"We see what is going on and we will remember." Darn skippy we will. The amendment passes on straight party lines.
I'll leave you with this thought: no party has a monopoly on corruption, conflicts of interest, and legislative malpractice. It's not a Republican thing; it's not a Democrat thing. It happens when a party has unchecked power. Today we saw what unchecked power looks like.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The first issues are largely procedural. Because of the age of this case (first filed in 1971), many of the original parties are deceased (passed beyond the jurisdiction of the court) and many of the doctors are no longer in practice.
Okay--here come the important arguments.
The AG is trying to argue that because the Supreme Court overruled Roe, the very old Arizona abortion law comes back in force.
In SB1457, the legislature created an “interpretive rule” that a “person” includes a fertilized egg at any stage of gestation.
This sets up scenario where child neglect and homicide statutes apply to patients and doctors who access abortion.
The plaintiffs are arguing that this provision is vague—in part because it invites arbitrary enforcement and in part because it’s unclear how this interacts with other laws.
The County Attorney or District Attorney election just became the most important race on your ballot in 2022.
Here's why 🧵
The Supreme Court has voted to overturn Roe v. Wade in the face of decades of legal precedent and roll back the rights of millions in America.
Arizona is one of 23 states that will now use the criminal law and Supreme Court decision to ban abortion.
As a result of this decision, doctors’ offices will be treated as crime scenes, and reproductive decisions will be invasively monitored by prosecutors and police.
The Arizona District Court is hearing oral arguments on SB1457 RIGHT NOW. Follow @ncjwarizona and this thread to hear how it's going.
Kicking off and it's a hot bench (that means that the judge has a lot of questions).
Of note at the outset, the judge has adopted the language of the Plaintiffs that this is a "Reason Ban" and not a "Non-discrimination Provision" as the Attorney General argues.
At issue is the prohibition against physicians providing abortions to people who are carrying fetuses with genetic abnormalities.
I was a student at the University of Notre Dame Law School while Amy Coney Barrett was a professor.
While she had a reputation for collegiality and excellence in the classroom, the biggest lesson she taught me was that a person could be kind and civil while embracing an ideology that regards some individuals worthy of fewer rights and less freedom.
Make no mistake about it: Judge Amy Coney Barrett is an extremist pick. Her record on reproductive rights, coverage for preexisting conditions, LGBTQ+ rights, and the dignity of work is abysmal.