Constituent Surveys
from 2010 and 2012 Legislative Sessions

From time to time, I solicited input input on issues facing the legislature from my constituents by way of survey.  These mailings went out in 2010 and 2012, mostly to my constituents; however, sometimes constituents forwarded the emails on to friends and acquaintances, so that many people had the opportunity to respond.

At times I was surprised by their preferences, such as in one of the surveys where the clear majority of you felt that simple possession of marijuana should be charged as a misdemeanor rather than a felony.  At other times I have disagreed with the majority, and even though I was elected as representative, sometimes I was privy to information that was not commonly known, and I felt the best interests of my constituents compelled to vote contrary to the preferences of the majority who responded.    

I am posting on this page below the results of those surveys in reverse order, starting from the most recent and going backwards to the earliest.  Questions and tallied answers appear together in these reports.


The most recent survey was emailed out on March 10, 2012.  It was the second survey of the 2012 legislative session, the centennial legislative session.  The questions covered budget issues, union activities, consolidation of election dates, and firearms on campus.  Click here to see the questions and the answers that were returned.    The first survey of the 2012 session click here, was sent in February and covered issues involving abortion, the Bible as a subject in school, a resolution to congress for a constitutional convention regarding the national debt ceiling, removing the possibility of parole for all murder convictions, tax credits to the movie industry, statutory standards vs local standards for school curricula.

In August of 2010, the governor called a special session.  Click here to see the survey about issues covered in this session: secret ballots for unionizing, SB1070 and anchor babies under the 14th Amendment, local tax assessments for keeping the Chicago Cubs in Mesa, mandatory sentencing penalties, and repealing the Affordable Care Act. Click here for the August 9 survey from that year. 

Two more surveys were sent out regarding the 2010 legislative session.  Part II (click here) dealt with questions involving increasing the wait time for divorce, photo radar, state tax on tourist activities to support keeping Chicago Cubs, adoption preference to married couples, immigration, legalizing carrying concealed weapons without a CCW permit.   Part I (click here) dealt with prioritizing revenue sources, penalties for possession of marijuana, mandatory sentences, constitutional authority, Arizona Lottery, sunset for payday loans. 



Click here to see Part 1 of the February survey from the 2010 legislative session



 2012 SURVEY second survey (March)

 
Overall Survey Results:

Survey #2 on Legislative Proposals in 2012


Budget - As you may know, Arizona will end this fiscal year (June 30th) with a surplus somewhere between $500 and $600 million.  The surplus is the result of the 1% sales tax increase enacted two years ago by a vote of the people.  The tax is due to expire on June 30, 2013.    Once the 1% sales tax goes away, there may be a small surplus in 2014; but thereafter, further deficits are still projected. Some have argued that the solution is for the legislature to enact a continuation of the sales tax that is set to expire next year.  They argue that no one could have foreseen the severity of the recession, and that 3 years wasn't enough time for Arizona to recover from the fiscal hit to our economy.   Others have said that we should not violate the promise made to the voters in the original campaign, which pledged that the tax would expire after three years.  Instead they believe our course should be to continue to reduce expenses even further.  What do you think?
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I favor letting the sales tax expire as promised.
   
64 28.0%
I believe the legislature should enact a new sales tax with a new expiration date, to avoid future deficits.
   
68 29.8%
I say let it expire, and let the people decide at the ballot box like they did last time.
   
79 34.6%
Other
   
13 5.7%
No Responses
   
4 1.7%
  Totals 228 100%

Budget - There are many possible uses for the surplus funds.  Various special interest groups have lobbied for their groups.  How would you like to see the current surplus used?  Please prioritize, with #1 being your first choice and # 9 being your last choice.
1 = Highest priority
Answer
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Number of
  Responses		 Ranking
Score*
Pay off debt
   
222 (2nd)  3.5
Restore K-12 education funding
   
222 (1st)   3.3
Restore funding to higher education (colleges and universities)
   
222 (7th)  5.2
Restore funding to the developmentally disabled population
   
222 (4th)  4.6
Build more prisons
   
222 (9th)  7.8
Set surplus aside to buy back previously sold state buildings
   
222 (8th)  6.2
Use for public safety
   
222 (6th)  5.1
Restore funding to AHCCCS (health care)
   
222 (3rd)  4.4
Save for future projected deficits
   
222 (5th)  4.9
*The Ranking Score is the weighted average calculated by dividing the sum of all weighted rankings by the number of total responses.


 Show Details
SB1484 - Paycheck deductions; employee authorization 
This bill prohibits third party deductions from public employee paychecks without an annual authorization.   In other words, if a government employee is having deductions taken out of his check each payday, he will have to re-authorize that particular deduction each year.Proponents of the bill believe this will require union members to re-evaluate each year whether they wish to continue supporting the objectives and services of their union.Opponents believe this bill creates an unnecessary nuisance and intrusion into the agreements between unions and their members.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I agree that there should be a required annual authorization for monthly deductions.
   
103 45.1%
I believe an initial authorization is all that is necessary until revoked.
   
107 46.9%
Other
   
13 5.7%
No Responses
   
5 2.1%
  Totals 228 100%

SB1485 -- Prohibition on Government Collective Bargaining This bill would prohibit government employers like cities and counties from engaging in collective bargaining with government unions such as police and fire. (This would also prohibit any "meet and confer" meetings between the parties.)Either you believe government employers can choose to bargain with unions, and that unions have the authority to negotiate on behalf of their members, or you don’t.  Supporters maintain that since government employers are not bargaining with their own funds, but instead with tax dollars, they will be more easily persuaded to grant raises and benefits because they are not dealing with their own money, but with taxes.   In addition, government employers are negotiating with people whose votes they want, in order to ensure their supporting politicians remain in office.  Opponents believe that without union representation, government employees will not be protected and will be forced into a take-it-or-leave-it situation with the employer.  They believe an individual employee can easily be singled out and exploited under these circumstances, with little meaningful recourse at his disposal except to go to court.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support a prohibition against collective bargaining (including "meet and confer") for public employees.
   
94 41.2%
I believe that public employees should be permitted to bargain collectively (including "meet and confer") with their government employers.
   
113 49.5%
Other
   
9 3.9%
No Responses
   
12 5.2%
  Totals 228 100%

SB1486 prohibits government employers from paying employees for time used while performing any union functions during work hours. At present, in some government entities, there is a policy allowing representatives of unions to conduct union business during their normal work hours such as representing a fellow employee during a disciplinary hearing.  Thus the union representative is actually being paid by the employer while he is performing union duties. The bill also forbids union employees from knowingly using their accrued leave/vacation time to perform a union function (the government entity would still be paying them for leave time), and gives a taxpayer legal standing to sue the government entity if it pays an employee's salary or wages for any union functions performed during work hours.Proponents believe that it is inappropriate to pay someone with taxpayer funds who is performing union duties, even though those duties may be for the benefit of fellow employees.  Supporters believe it is more appropriate that the employee conduct the business of the union on his own time.Opponents of this bill maintain the current practice is fair since the employee is directly working for the benefit of all employees and thereby, presumably, the employer.  Opponents believe it is appropriate that he continue to be on the employer's clock while performing union function on behalf of fellow employees.  
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I believe the union member should conduct union business on his own time.
   
134 58.7%
I support the current practice of the union representative being paid by his employer for union work.
   
75 32.8%
Other
   
12 5.2%
No Responses
   
7 3.0%
  Totals 228 100%

HB2826 Election Consolidation.  This bill would move local elections (municipal, county, school district, and others) to August and November of even years, aligning them with the occurrence of state elections.  In other words, the intent is to ensure all local elections would coincide with state and national elections, and occur predictably on one of two days in even years.  Proponents believe this would promote higher turnout and greater input by taxpayers, curb the dominance of special interest spending in local politics, and save municipalities money by consolidating elections with the general cycle.  Opponents (including all 15 county recorders and elections officials) believe this will cause voter fatigue and confusion, in that the ballots may be so large that voters will be bewildered trying to focus on so many competing issues and races at once.  They also point out it does not save costs, but in fact will ultimately increase costs.  Creating so many different voter-specific ballots for each voter’s unique overlapping elective districts, such as city, school, county, judicial, legislative, and congressional districts, as well as countywide, statewide and in some years, national elections will be logistically cumbersome, expensive and error-prone. In addition, this bill would prevent the special consideration of local issues in separate elections, such as when the City of Mesa had a vote about the Chicago Cubs and the Gaylord Entertainment election.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support the consolidation of elections
   
100 43.8%
I oppose the consolidation of elections.
   
112 49.1%
Other
   
8 3.5%
No Responses
   
8 3.5%
  Totals 228 100%
SB1087 S/E (strike everything) allows a college faculty member with a CCW to carry a firearm on campus. (CCW is a permit to Carry Concealed Weapon) SB1087, a bill that we will be hearing next Thursday (3-15-12) in the Judiciary Committee, has to do with guns on colleges campuses.  A new “strike-everything” amendment to SB1087 will give a legal right to  faculty at colleges and universities who have a concealed carry permit to carry a firearm on campus.Proponents contend that this will enhance safety on campuses and secure Arizona’s citizens their constitutional second amendment rights.  The faculty will be able to defend themselves and their students in the event there is an incident similar to what occurred at Virginia Tech in 2007.Opponents argue that there is a serious possibility of shooter confusion for first responders as they arrive on the scene.  They also point out that since a CCW permit no longer requires training, there is a high probability of well-intentioned but untrained faculty actually jeopardizing the safety of students. 
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support faculty with a concealed carry permit having guns on campus.
   
96 42.1%
I oppose faculty with a concealed carry permit having guns on campus.
   
116 50.8%
Other
   
14 6.1%
No Responses
   
2 <1%
  Totals 228 100%



2012 SURVEY , first survey (February) 


 

Overall Survey Results: 

Survey on Legislative Proposals in 2012


Currently, the high costs of production in Hollywood and New York City have led some states to provide tax incentives to encourage the development of the film industry. New Mexico provided such incentives several years ago and now has its own movie studio.  SB 1170 would create individual and corporate tax credits for qualified production expenditures for multimedia production costs.Those who favor the bill believe such incentives are necessary to attract the movie industry to Arizona, and thereby create jobs. Presently, the competition of New Mexico has the industry flying over Arizona from Los Angeles to New Mexico. Proponents believe without tax credits there will be insufficient motivation for the development of movie studios in Arizona.  This argument has also been used to attract the solar industry and bio-medical research.  These incentives, they argue, mean jobs for Arizonans.Opponents maintain that it is not the business of government to select winners and losers and that providing benefits to one industry over another is a type of corporate "welfare" that is inherently unfair.  Let the market forces work.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support tax incentives in order to attract the movie industry to Arizona.
   
103 45.9%
I oppose the government's attempt to attract specific industries by the use of tax incentives.
   
86 38.3%
Other
   
27 12.0%
No Responses
   
8 3.5%
  Totals 224 100%

Several bills are being sponsored by legislators to propose that certain subjects be taught as part of the K-12 curriculum.  HB 2473 would sanction the study of the Bible as an elective course in high school. HB 2041 requires a course on free enterprise and personal finance as a graduation requirement.  HB 2616 would require districts to provide medically accurate and comprehensive sex education for grades six-12. Proponents argue that it is the responsibility of the legislature to require that specific basic courses be taught in the K-12 curriculum, and the legislature should set minimum standards and guidelines.  They also believe the legislature should ban the teaching of certain courses it finds offensive or antithetical to the state's interests, such as the Ethnic Studies course last year in Tucson. Opponents maintain that decisions about actual curriculum should be a local matter best left up to the school districts and their local boards.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support the state legislature creating specific courses to be added to or removed from the curriculum in education throughout the state.
   
52 23.2%
I believe local school boards should set up their own individual standards.
   
130 58.0%
Other
   
36 16.0%
No Responses
   
6 2.6%
  Totals 224 100%

SCR 1005 calls for a constitutional convention to amend the U.S. Constitution to provide that any increase in the federal debt requires an approval of the majority of the states through their state legislators.  Proponents suggest that this will help control federal spending and prevent Congress from increasing the debt ceiling. Opponents fear that such a constitutional restriction could inadvertently choke the federal government's ability to cope with unanticipated events.  Some also believe that states needing federal help would regularly vote for increases to the debt ceiling, while those states that have been responsibly managed would oppose increases.  We see a similar dynamic in play now, with the European Union debt crisis. Opponents also argue that such a convention, once begun, has the potential to run amok and to delve into issues not originally intended to be addressed.Proponents answer that such fears are unwarranted since any proposed change to the Constitution requires the votes of three quarters of the states.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support the call for a constitutional convention.
   
58 25.8%
I oppose the call for a constitutional convention.
   
137 61.1%
Other
   
21 9.3%
No Responses
   
8 3.5%
  Totals 224 100%

The Center for Arizona Policy (CAP) is sponsoring legislation to further restrict abortion in the state. One bill prioritizes the allocation of federal funds in such a way as to curb funding eligibility for abortion.  Another bill requires that a fetus at 20 weeks be considered viable under current medical conditions.  (Presently, 24 weeks is considered viable.)  Except in cases of medical emergency, a physician who knowingly performs an abortion on a fetus of more than 20 weeks would be guilty of a class 5 felony which carries a prison penalty, and the loss of the medical license.  There are other provisions which would require enhanced education, notice and consent for a woman who is making this decision.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support a law adding further restrictions and felony penalties for abortion.
   
103 45.9%
I believe abortion laws are sufficiently restrictive the way they are now.
   
88 39.2%
Other
   
29 12.9%
No Responses
   
4 1.7%
  Totals 224 100%

Another bill before the house requires that anyone 18 years of age or more who is convicted of first-degree murder shall receive either the death penalty or be imprisoned for their natural life. This changes the current law which provides for either the death penalty, prison for natural life, or prison for a minimum of 25 years (35 years for the death of a child) with the possibility of parole after 25 ( or 35) years.  Under the new law, there would be no possibility of a pardon or clemency by the governor. Proponents argue that by removing the possibility of parole, there is finality for the family of the victim inasmuch as they will never have to return and speak before a parole board, or ever have to worry about an offender being released.Opponents suggest that there may be instances where the nature of the circumstances, including the maturity of the defendant or the motivation for the crime, were such that after 25 or 35 years, a person may be sufficiently rehabilitated to justify his release on parole. They argue that the option for parole should be preserved, so that decades later if the individual is deemed an appropriate candidate for parole, he is not prevented from applying.  The clemency board makes the final decision to grant or deny.  
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support death or natural life as the only two possible sentences for a first-degree murder conviction.
   
76 33.9%
Besides death and natural life sentences, I support leaving the other option of a possible parole after 25+ years in prison where it may be appropriate.
   
122 54.4%
Other
   
22 9.8%
No Responses
   
4 1.7%
  Totals 224 100%




2010 SURVEY , special session survey (August) 

 

Overall Survey Results:


Survey on Legislative Proposals


The Arizona State Legislature has been called into special session this week (Aug. 9th) to address a referendum on the “card check” issue.  The federal government is considering a measure, “The Employee Free Choice Act, “ which if passed, would stipulate that employees at a business could form a union when a majority of the employees sign a card indicating a preference for the union.  It would eliminate the necessity of an election by secret ballot.  Our referendum is an effort to prevent the federal law from taking precedence over state law.  If the referendum is passed, the right of employees to vote by secret ballot will be preserved.  If the referendum fails, then employees may unionize when 50% of the employees sign a card indicating their agreement to form a union (“majority sign-up”).
The controversy lies in who is considered most likely to intimidate the employee. Proponents of card check believe employers intimidate their employees into not signing a card.  Opponents of card check believe unions intimidate other employees into signing a card.   Please indicate your preference.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support card check, and the right of the employees to unionize when 50% of employees sign a card indicating a preference for a union.
   
4 4.4%
I support the right to a secret ballot by employees in voting whether or not to organize a union.
   
81 90.0%
No Responses
   
5 5.5%
  Totals 90 100%


Everyone is aware of SB 1070.  Passed by the legislature this year, the bill duplicates the federal law in order to give state law enforcement the right to arrest and detain illegal immigrants and report them to ICE.  I assume you have heard all the arguments pro and con.  Please let me know how you feel.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support SB 1070.
   
76 84.4%
I oppose SB 1070.
   
14 15.5%
No Responses
 
0 0.0%
  Totals 90 100%

Senator Pearce, the author of SB 1070, is preparing to file a bill to prevent the state from issuing birth certificates to “anchor babies.”  Anchor babies are children born in the U.S. to citizens of other countries, regardless  of whether the mother is here legally or not.  Sen. Pearce believes the current law of allowing anchor babies to receive U.S. citizenship encourages the violation of U.S. immigration law.   Because the parents of such children are “not subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States (as per the 14th Amendment), the children are therefore not entitled to citizenship.
Opponents believe we should not punish the children, who once they are born, become subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
 
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I favor anchor babies receiving birth certificates.
   
13 14.4%
I oppose anchor babies receiving birth certificates.
   
77 85.5%
No Responses
 
0 0.0%
  Totals 90 100%


Congress has passed and the President has signed a significant health care reform package, commonly known as “Obamacare.”  There is a move to repeal the act.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support the health care reform as enacted by Congress and signed by the President.
   
8 8.8%
I am opposed to the health care reform and urge its repeal.
   
82 91.1%
No Responses
 
0 0.0%
  Totals 90 100%


I am presently chairing a sentencing reform committee to re-evaluate our state’s mandatory sentencing structure.  Our current laws provide for mandatory consecutive sentences for each count for someone possessing child pornography.   While I believe this is appropriate for those who create, sell or publish child porn, the current law imprisons a mere possessor of child porn more harshly than someone who rapes a child.  A child rapist would receive up to 35 years.  This is incongruous to me.

One example is Mr. Morton Berger.  Mr. Berger was a 50 year old high school teacher in Glendale who had once been nominated for “Teacher of the Year.”  Mr. Berger had no prior felonies and no prior contacts with law enforcement.  However, it was discovered that at his home, he had downloaded child porn on his home computer.  Mr. Berger was convicted on 20 counts of possession of child porn, and received 20 ten year sentences, to be served consecutively; in other words, a 200 year sentence.

I would be interested to learn what you believe is an appropriate sentence for Mr. Berger.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
200 years is appropriate
   
4 4.3%
No jail time, but a long probation
   
16 17.3%
1 to 5 years
   
30 32.6%
5 to 10 years
   
12 13.0%
10 to 20 years
   
10 10.8%
20 -35 years
   
3 3.2%
Other
   
19 20.6%
  Totals 92 100%

The Chicago Cubs have been in Mesa for 57 years.  There are various estimates of their economic impact on the City and the State, anywhere from $65 million to $120 million.  The legislature failed to obtain the cooperation of the other members of the Cactus League in taxing ticket sales in order to pay for a new Cubs stadium.  A Florida group has offered to build the Cubs a new stadium if they will move to Florida.  Mesa has chosen an alternative means of financing the Cubs stadium.  It will not raise taxes, but will borrow funds against the sale of land it owns in Pinal County, and additionally, will impose a 2% bed tax on hotel/motel stays.  How do you feel about such a move?
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support keeping the Cubs in Mesa.
   
50 55.5%
Let the Cubs go.
   
34 37.7%
Other
   
6 6.6%
No Responses
 
0 0.0%
  Totals 90 100%





2010 SURVEY , Part II (February)  

 

Overall Survey Results:


Survey on Legislative Proposals


The House will be considering a bill to require married couples to wait 180 days after filing for a divorce.  The present waiting period is 90 days. Proponents believe waiting a longer period of time will ultimately cause couples to reconcile.  There is some evidence that states with a longer waiting period have a lower divorce rate. Opponents believe that it is wrong to make couples wait once they have decided to get divorced.  Waiting prevents people from moving on with their lives.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
The waiting period should be changed to 180 days.
   
46 32.3%
The waiting period should remain at 90 days.
   
91 64.0%
No Responses
   
5 3.5%
  Totals 142 100

Although the photo radar program is expiring June 30th, it is possible that the legislature may have an opportunity to have a say in the renewal of the program.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support the continuation of photo radar on our freeways.
   
45 31.6%
I do not support photo radar on our freeways.
   
88 61.9%
Other
   
9 6.3%
No Responses
 
0 0.0%
  Totals 142 100%

The legislature will have to decide whether or not to go to extraordinary measures in order to keep the Chicago Cubs in Mesa for Spring Training.  This most likely will mean placing a new tax on rental cars or hotel rooms, increasing the cost of tickets for Cactus League game, or perhaps taxing other tourist activities.  Supporters estimate that the Cubs bring in somewhere between $80 million to $120 million to the East Valley's economy each year, and that without the Cubs, the entire Cactus League would suffer. Opponents believe that the new taxes will potentially decrease tourism, and that government should not be helping professional sports teams.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support doing whatever it takes to keep the Cubs in Mesa.
   
74 52.1%
I do not believe that the state should become involved in keeping the Cubs here in Mesa. It is a matter of private industry.
   
64 45.0%
No Responses
   
4 2.8%
  Totals 142 100%
Social conservatives believe that there should be a preference in adoption cases for married couples.  In other words, all other factors being equal, an adoption board should give preference to a married couple over a single applicant. Proponents suggest that there is a real need for each child if possible to have the example of both a mother and father. Opponents believe that the stated preference in the statutes would decrease the number of applicants for adoption, and therefore the number of adoptions.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support the creation of a preference for married couples
   
82 57.7%
I believe there should be no expressed preference for married couples.
   
58 40.8%
No Responses
   
2 1.4%
  Totals 142 100%

Over the last few years, the state has enacted by statute and initiative process a number of laws to restrict illegal immigration.  A new statute is being promoted that will designate it a misdemeanor for someone to be in the state illegally.   Cities and counties will not be able to have a policy that will prevent individual officers from inquiring into a person's legal status when there is reasonable suspicion that some one is in the country illegally.  In addition, it will be a misdemeanor for someone who is in violation of a criminal offense to give a ride to someone who is here illegally.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support additional, harsher laws to keep illegal immigration down.
   
78 54.9%
I believe the laws are sufficient now; we do not need to add laws, just enforce the ones we have.
   
59 41.5%
No Responses
   
5 3.5%
  Totals 142 100%
This is a Second Amendment question.  Arizona currently permits its residents to carry a firearm without restrictions provided it is out in the open, that is, the gun must be visible to others.  A person can carry a concealed weapon provided they get a permit through the Department of Public Safety, which requires the submitting of fingerprints and taking several hours of training. A new bill would remove the requirement of obtaining a concealed weapons permit, and allow any person to carry a concealed weapon.  Proponents believe that the Second Amendment precludes the government from restricting a person from having a firearm.   Proponents reason that since the "bad guys" will not follow the law anyway, that law abiding citizens should have the right to protect themselves.  Also, people in cold country should be entitled to have a firearm under their coats.Opponents believe that times have changed, and that allowing anyone to carry a weapon without some training and without some restriction risks greater harm to the general population.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
The law should not restrict a person's right to bear arms.
   
61 42.9%
The law should not be expanded, but should remain as is.
   
45 31.6%
Further restrictions should be placed on the carrying of firearms.
   
33 23.2%
No Responses
   
3 2.1%
  Totals 142 100%

Arizona's budget is obviously the biggest issue facing the state.  Budgets for all departments and agencies are being cut.  Nevertheless, it will be necessary to assign priorities as we continue to attempt to resolve the budget crisis.  I would be interested in your assessment of where the priorities should be.   Please indicate, with 7 being the most important and 1 being the least important, what you feel the priorities should be in Arizona.
1 = Least
Answer
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Number of
  Responses		 Ranking
Score*
Creation of Jobs
   
140 (3rd) 4.5
Education, K-12
   
140 (1st) 5.0
Higher Education
   
140 (4th) 3.7
Public Safety
   
140 (2nd) 5.0
AZ Healthcare Cost Containment System (AHCCCS)
   
140 (7th) 3.2
Department of Corrections
   
140 (5th) 3.5
Arizona Department of Economic Security
   
140 (6th) 3.2
*The Ranking Score is the weighted average calculated by dividing the sum of all weighted rankings by the number of total responses.
Generally speaking, in this economy I favor:
1 = Least
Answer
1 2 3 4
Number of
  Responses		 Ranking
Score*
Raising Taxes
   
140 (3rd) 2.4
Lowering Taxes
   
140 (2nd) 2.6
Reducing Expenditures
   
140 (1st) 3.3
Increasing Spending
   
140 (4th) 1.8
*The Ranking Score is the weighted average calculated by dividing the sum of all weighted rankings by the number of total responses.




2010 SURVEY , Part I (February)   

 

Overall Survey Results:


Constituent Survey on Legislative Proposals


In the event that the Legislature finds it necessary to increase revenues by tax increases, which kind of tax increase do you believe is preferable?
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
Personal Income Tax
   
1 1.5%
Corporate Income Tax
   
7 11.1%
Sales Tax
   
34 53.9%
Property tax
   
1 1.5%
Other
   
20 31.7%
No Responses
 
0 0.0%
  Totals 63 100%
What is your understanding of the size of the current budget deficit in 2010?
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
Under $1 billion
   
5 7.9%
$1 billion to $2 billion
   
20 31.7%
$2 billion to $3 billion
   
16 25.3%
More than $3 billion
   
22 34.9%
No Responses
 
0 0.0%
  Totals 63 100%
This Monday, the House will consider a bill to renew the Arizona State Lottery for another 25 years.  Proponents note that the lottery brings in millions of dollars in state revenue, which in 2009 brought in $43 million to the General Fund, and an additional $80+ million for other specified funds.  Opponents argue that gambling is a negative social value and primarily a tax on the poor.  This is money that would likely be spent for more purposeful uses.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I favor renewing the state lottery.
   
29 46.0%
I favor not renewing the state lottery.
   
34 53.9%
No Responses
 
0 0.0%
  Totals 63 100%

One of the public debates that continues from time to time is whether or not the subject matter of a bill is constrained by the authority of the Constitution.  This pertains to both state and federal legislation, as well as state and federal constitutions.  Which of the following statements most correctly agrees with your view?  
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
The Constitution limits the power of the government, so legislative bodies should not enact anything outside of powers authorized by the language of the document.
   
45 71.4%
The Constitution is a living document, because it could not possibly have anticipated all the issues in today's society. Therefore, legislative bodies should have the freedom to create laws that are necessary to address important issues.
   
16 25.3%
No Responses
   
2 3.1%
  Totals 63 100%

During the last election, an initiative to extend the payday loan industry was voted down by voters.  I voted against this initiative, as did many others, for the simple reason that it was too complicated (3 pages of statutory revisions) to be handled by voter initiative. 

I believe voter initiatives should be simple and easily understood, such as the initiative on marriage, which was only 19 words. Whether you agreed or disagreed with it, everyone understood its implications. 

This session, the legislature must make a decision to either let the payday loan industry sunset (meaning, it ceases to be legal in Arizona at the conclusion of its authorized time window), or to let the industry be revised and extended either indefinitely, or for another period of years.  
Proponents for payday loans argue that the industry fulfills an obvious need in society.  There are a great many stores precisely because many people have nowhere else to turn for small amounts of quick cash.  If people do not have ready access to a source of funds, they will be forced to deal with unscrupulous private parties, or else relatives, for necessary quick cash.  Proponents argue that it is better to have a regulated industry than to leave it up to private parties, or to subject people to over-draft charges on their bank accounts.  They contend that the government does not have the right to limit the options of people who need money.
Opponents argue that these payday loan stores take advantage of people who are in desperate circumstances by charging them exorbitant interest rates.  People only get further into debt by the use of these types of loans.  Opponents maintain that the government should not allow these excessive interest rates.
It should be noted that in order to obtain a payday loan, one must already have an existing checking account.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I support continuing and regulating this industry with modifications.
   
24 38.0%
I support sunsetting and extinguishing this industry.
   
39 61.9%
No Responses
 
0 0.0%
  Totals 63 100%

As the chair of the Interim Committee on Sentencing Reform, I am charged with the responsibility of finding ways to reduce the costs to the state of incarcerating convicted felons while still protecting public safety.

Several recommendations have been received which could reduce the prison populations of the state.   I am interested in your views about some of these recommendations.

Felonies in Arizona are classified as 1 through 6, with Class 1 Felonies being the most serious (eg. Murder), and Class 6 Felonies being the least serious (eg.  possession of marijuana, criminal damage, etc.).  There are 3 classes of misdemeanors.  Misdemeanors may require jail time and fines, but a person does not go to prison at the Department of Corrections for a misdemeanor.   Many occupational professions do not allow an applicant with a prior felony conviction to apply for licensure.

One recommendation that has been made to the committee for reducing the number of incarcerations and felony convictions is to follow the example of some states by reducing simple possession of marijuana (POM) from a Class 6 felony to a Class 1 misdemeanor.  
 
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I favor keeping POM as a felony.
   
20 31.7%
I favor reclassifying POM as a misdemeanor.
   
43 68.2%
No Responses
 
0 0.0%
  Totals 63 100%

Currently, Arizona has a system of mandatory sentencing that provides predetermined sentences for many different types of crimes.  These sentences are determined by the Arizona Legislature.

Proponents of mandatory sentencing maintain that such sentences are necessary to provide similar sentences for similar crimes throughout the state, and to insure that people are adequately punished.

Opponents argue that judges need the ability to take into account the different  circumstances of each individual case before making a decision.  Opponents also argue that eliminating mandatory sentencing will reduce a trend by prosecutors to charge the most severe crime in order to force a plea bargain and avoid trial by jury.
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
I favor keeping mandatory sentencing with predetermined sentences.
   
17 26.9%
I favor giving judges more discretion to weigh the circumstances before handing down a sentence.
   
46 73.0%
No Responses
 
0 0.0%
  Totals 63 100%

In the upcoming election for Governor, who would you vote for?  (choose only one)
 
Answer
0% 100%
Number of
Responses		 Response
Ratio
Jan Brewer
   
9 14.2%
Terry Goddard
   
1 1.5%
Owen "Buzz" Mills
   
1 1.5%
John Mungar
   
5 7.9%
Dean Martin
   
17 26.9%
Joe Arpaio
   
10 15.8%
Other
   
20 31.7%
No Responses
 
0 0.0%
  Totals 63 100%



Copyright 2012  •  Committee to Elect Cecil Ash JP  •  All rights reserved
Website Builder