Category Archives: Legislature
Governor Signs Pro-Woman Measure Restricting Abortionists from Accessing Taxpayer Funds
PHOENIX – Governor Jan Brewer this evening signed into law HB 2800, known as the Whole Woman’s Health Funding Priority Act. The Governor signed the measure while speaking at a reception for the Susan B. Anthony List, a group devoted to helping elect pro-life officials to public office.
HB 2800 prioritizes the distribution of public family-planning funds to health care entities that provide comprehensive care for women. The measure also prohibits the state or any political subdivision from contracting with a person or facility where non-federally qualified abortions are performed for the provision of family planning services.
“This is a common sense law that tightens existing state regulations and closes loopholes in order to ensure that taxpayer dollars are not used to fund abortions, whether directly or indirectly,” said Governor Brewer. “By signing this measure into law, I stand with the majority of Americans who oppose the use of taxpayer funds for abortion.”
Kansas, North Carolina and Texas have already enacted legislation similar to the Whole Woman’s Health Funding Priority Act. Indiana, New Jersey and Wisconsin have used their budget processes to bar public funding for abortion providers.
Arizona Senate Votes to Defund Planned Parenthood
PHOENIX ─ Today, the Arizona State Senate passed the Whole Woman’s Health Funding Priority Act of Arizona (HB 2800) that will defund abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood of state family planning money. The vote was 18-8.
The bill is based on model legislation developed by the Susan B. Anthony List and the Alliance Defense Fund, and prioritizes family planning funds away from abortion-centered businesses like Planned Parenthood to entities that provide women with comprehensive health care.
Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colorado), Vice President of Government Affairs for the SBA List said, “Planned Parenthood’s abortion-centered business model does not need or deserve taxpayer dollars. We encourage Gov. Brewer to quickly sign this bill into law. Arizona is leading the charge to protect taxpayers and women from Planned Parenthood and the violence of abortion.”
Dr. Charmaine Yoest, president & CEO of Americans United for Life, called today’s Senate action “a devastating blow for Planned Parenthood. Arizona has dealt a historic rejection to Planned Parenthood. It’s a huge blow to the abortion empire with national implications for the entire pro-life movement. This historic ban will immediately save lives in Arizona despite Planned Parenthood’s best efforts to preserve this horrific and lucrative late-term abortion procedure.”
Arizona is joining a fast-growing group of states defunding Planned Parenthood, which kills more than 300,000 preborn children each year and has been accused of defrauding taxpayers with the $487 million it receives in federal funding.
According to SBA List, eight states successfully defunded Planned Parenthood of more than $61.7 million last year. Currently, Ohio, Iowa, New Hampshire, and Oklahoma are also weighing legislation that would defund the nation’s abortion giant.
Pearce Responds to Worsley’s Harsh Attack
By Russell Pearce, Mesa Candidate for Arizona Legislature
On Tuesday, Bob Worsley’s campaign attacked me and like-minded Arizonans for our efforts to draw attention to–and business away from–the Phoenix New Times and its corporate owner, The Village Voice. While hypocritically attacking me for some imagined ³divisive rhetoric,² Worsley’s campaign offered a strangely disconnected defense of the Phoenix New Times while asking voters to draw a connection between Congressman Raul Grijalva and me.
Worsley’s rhetoric was obviously meant to be divisive, but he could not pick a more ill fitting pair than Grijalva and me.
“What do Russell Pearce and Raul Grijalva have in common?” asked his press release. The answer is nothing. I’m a proven conservative, Raul is a committed liberal. I have a 100% pro-life, pro-family, pro-Second Amendment voting record; Raul’s is the opposite. I helped to write and pass Arizona’s Jobs Bill and led the passage of the first truly balanced state budget in years, while Grijalva passed ObamaCare and voted for trillion dollar budget deficits. My actions led to job creation and economic growth, while Grijalva’s led to recession and depression. I wrote and passed SB1070 to enforce our nation¹s immigration laws, while Grijalva opposed our efforts and wrote that the bill was bad for Arizona.
Come to think of it, so did Bob Worsley. You wouldn’t know that he wrote about it because he deleted part of his writings just after he announced for office, but the same Bob Worsley who wants to attack me for non-existent commonalities with Raul Grijalva wants voters to ignore (or better still never find out) that he shares his illegal immigration ideology with Raul.
In his desperate attempt to try to connect me to Grijalva, Worsley jumped the shark and decided that attempts to change the business practices associated with the New Times and its owner were morally equivalent to Raul Grijalva calling for a boycott of the entire State of Arizona because he disagreed with SB1070 and enforcing the law.
It is worth revisiting the Phoenix New Times and The Village Voice to learn more about the people that Bob Worsley is defending.
According to media reports, The Village Voice and its family of newspapers account for 70% of all prostitution advertising in the United States. 48 State Attorney Generals and 19 U.S. Senators–Republicans and Democrats alike–have called on them to stop running sex ads which have been tied to child sex trafficking, and which collectively finance a national operation of hate campaigns against conservative individuals and organizations, elected officials and public servants, law enforcement and others.
Investigations into these crimes have led to more than 50 arrests in 22 states. Millions of tainted dollars flow into the coffers of these
publications and those paying the price are too often themselves victims of the most horrible crimes imaginable. Human trafficking and child and adult prostitution are horrific, and it is right and justifiable that decent people here in Arizona and across the country draw attention to these crimes and act to hold businesses that profit from them responsible.
While our effort to let advertisers know the truth about these publications is brand new, we have already been rewarded because the great people at Harkins Theaters and Buddy Stubbs Harley Davidson have pulled their advertising. Bob Worsley accused me of threatening Harkins Theaters, but his accusations were wildly off the mark. The good folks at Harkins run a decent, family-oriented business, and they are much better off today knowing the truth about where their advertising dollars were going. And the people of Arizona will reward Harkins with even more business for being a responsible and family-friendly corporate citizen.
SB1070 was about enforcing laws to keep people safe. Liberals like Raul Grijalva and Bob Worsley opposed SB1070 and Grijalva went so far as to call for a boycott of his own state because he was mad that it was going to enforce the law.
Exposing the New Times and its corporate model is about exposing human exploitation, indecency, and alleged illegality. Bob Worsley, Sean Noble, and the rest of his political team oppose our efforts because they are desperate to attack me with a ludicrous comparison to Raul Grijalva. In so doing they take the side of an entity that profits off of some of the worst crimes imaginable.
I am disappointed in Bob and his campaign, both for the position they are taking, the negativity with which they are beginning this campaign, and the very same divisive rhetoric they would accuse me of.
I hope that Bob will change his mind and join those of us who are working to expose these practices. Decent Arizonans from all over this great state are rallying to the effort and we certainly have room for Bob, Sean and the rest of his team. We can and ought to be able to agree on the need to end the exploitation of children, and I hope that political ambition does not prevent Team Worsley from getting on the right side of this very important issue.
The citizens of our district deserve an honest and decent debate on the issues facing our state. I hope Mr. Worsley will drop his attacks and join me in that effort.
Gilbert’s Urie Not Seeking Legislative Re-Election
Seeing Red AZ reports:
Rep. Steve Urie takes a hike for greener pastures
Single-term state Rep. Steve Urie (R-Dist.22), has announced he‘s not interested in running to retain his seat in the Arizona legislature.
His reason? “I just really like working on the local level,” said Urie, a Republican who first entered politics in 1999 when he was elected to the Gilbert Town Council.
Not one to tax himself, Urie says the demands of the office were too high for a job that is supposed to be part-time. Apparently he had no idea of the legislative job description when he ran for the office — although he willingly resigned his Town Council position to campaign for the state House seat.
In a statement announcing his decision to run for Justice of the Peace, he said, “I’m excited for the opportunity to work more directly with the citizens of Gilbert, Mesa, and Chandler and to bring my personal experience to this job.”
Urie conveniently omits the fact that there is a much more attractive benefits package and salary of over $95,000, as JP’s earn 65% of the $150,000 per year Superior Court judge’s base salary. And instead of gearing up for reelection every two years, JPs only face the voters every four years. Plus, there’s also an impressive black robe and the aura of being a judge — even if you’re actually a real estate agent and property manager.
State legislators earn a paltry $24,000 a year + per diem. They need a raise. Shuck and Jivester Steve Urie needs a dose of truth serum and a focus booster.
PAChyderm Coalition, a Reagan Republican group that rates GOP legislators has Urie dragging bottom at an uncomfortable 36 out of a list of 40, with a grade of 54.6% and unflatteringly rated as a “Big Government Republican” on its most recent scorecard.
Abortion Ban Passes in Senate, Lesko Bill Down but Not Out
Two important bills went in opposite direction in the Arizona Legislature this week.
Arizona’s Senate voted 20-10 Tuesday to ban abortions of preborn children at 20 weeks. If this bill is eventually signed into law, it would change the current legality of abortion until a preborn child is “viable.”
Senate Minority Leader David Schapira (Tempe left-winger) boasted to reporters that lawmakers are empowered to determine life and death outcomes.
Sen. Steve Smith, Maricopa conservative, disagreed: “I would like to listen to the 50 million-plus children that have been aborted and killed since Roe v. Wade. I would like to listen to what they think of this bill.”
And so did Sen. Steve Yarbrough, Chandler conservative, who said, “There’s a third person in that room. There’s the baby. Who speaks for her, the totally innocent one with no voice? Who has the duty and the right to speak for her? We do.”
The bill now goes across the capital lawn to the Arizona House of Representatives for its deliberation.
The East Valley Tribune story prominently features in its story the views of Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest profiteer of abortion deaths. But nowhere is Arizona Right to Life or the Center for Arizona Policy included in the story written by left-wing reporter Howard Fischer.
***
The Arizona Senate Wednesday defeated HB 2625, a bill introduced by Rep. Debbie Lesko, conservative, to protect religious freedom. This bill declares that any entity or individual with a religious objection to paying for objectionable insurance coverage is free to contract with an employer and insurer who want to honor their conscience. The vote was 17-13 against.
Republican Nancy Barton tendered a last-minute “no” vote to keep the bill alive for re-consideration. But no-votes included Scottsdale abortion advocate Michele Reagan, Mesa RINOs Jerry Lewis and Rich Crandall, and Republicans John Nelson, John McComish and Senate President Steve Pierce.
Radicals Attack CAP: Let’s Clear a Few Things Up
By Cathi Herod, President
Center for Arizona Policy
What a week. I don’t know if I’ve ever witnessed such baseless and false attacks on CAP-supported bills as I saw this week. While I understand that it may be more entertaining for some to blatantly lie about legislation, the people deserve to know the truth.
So I’m going to clear a few things up about CAP-supported bills and other issues that have been misconstrued in the press and liberal blogs this week.
HB 2625 - This simple bill protects the religious freedom of faith-based groups and other employers. No employer should be forced by the government to pay for contraception and abortifacients in their insurance plans when doing so would violate their First Amendment protected religious beliefs. The media has falsely picked up the opponents’ outrageous claims that the bill would force women to tell employers why they are taking birth control pills. Read the bill. That claim is not in the bill.
Center for Arizona Policy does not take a position on family planning or birth control. We do, however take a very strong position that faith-based institutions and employers who hold a religious belief regarding contraception should not be compelled to violate those beliefs and pay for the medication.
The bill’s sponsor, Representative Debbie Lesko has done an incredible job in numerous media interviews explaining this point, like this interview with Greta Van Sustren. Take a moment to thank Rep. Lesko by emailing her at: dlesko@azleg.gov?subject=Thank%20You!
SB 1359 - Sponsored by Sen. Nancy Barto, this legislation is based on common sense and decency. It prohibits “wrongful life” and “wrongful birth” lawsuits. These lawsuits arise when a child is born with a disability, and the parents sue the doctor claiming that had they known their child had a disability, they would have had an abortion.
These lawsuits endorse the viewpoint that the life of a disabled child is worth less than the life of a child without a disability. Imagine what the children of the parents who file these lawsuits must feel when they get older and find out that their parents sued because they wish they would have had an abortion.
The attacks on this bill have truly been far-fetched. Some blogs claimed that this bill would allow doctors to knowingly withhold information from parents. Untrue. This bill does nothing to protect doctors that cause harm to preborn children, withhold information, or are grossly negligent.
Bullying, Part Two. Perhaps you’ve seen the attacks on me and CAP this week regarding the anti-bullying legislation I wrote about last week. I’ve been called a “legislative terrorist” and I’m sure a few other names by the time you read this.
While most of the attacks do not warrant a response, I do want to address one false statement made by State Senator David Schapira. He has claimed multiple times that I said SB 1462 is a “back door gay bill, no pun intended.” I would never say something so crass. Sen. Schapira — disagree with me if you want. But stop telling lies about what I supposedly said.
Click here to see a Channel 12 news clip attacking us for our position then click here to read the statement I issued to the press in response.
Pornographers coming to Arizona? – Several of you have written me recently about the California pornography industry threatening to come to Arizona because of new regulations in Los Angeles.
What wasn’t mentioned is the huge roadblock in their way: filming pornography in Arizona violates our prostitution laws.
Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery sent a clear message to pornographers this week when he released a statement explaining how virtually all of those involved in pornography could be subject to felony charges:
Under Arizona law, anyone paid to appear in a pornographic movie may be guilty of the crime of prostitution, which carries mandatory jail time as well as the possibility of other penalties. Furthermore, anyone involved in other aspects of producing pornographic movies, including soliciting individuals to appear, collecting a fee from the monies received by individuals solicited to appear by virtue of an agent relationship, transporting individuals from California to Arizona for the purpose of appearing in a pornographic movie, and/or establishing a venue for the filming and/or production of pornographic movies may be guilty of committing one or several felonies in the state of Arizona. Accordingly, Arizona law precludes the establishment of a “pornography industry” to any degree such as that present in California.
You can read his full statement here. After you read it, take a moment to thank Mr. Montgomery for standing up to the pornography industry.
White House Dictates Compromise on Contraception Mandate
By John Semmens: Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News
John Semmens
In an effort to quell rising opposition to its mandate for all employers to provide contraceptive coverage in healthcare benefits to workers, the White House issued a directive that it maintains “ends the discussion.” Under the directive insurers would be required to provide this coverage “free of charge” to employers.
“By putting the onus on the insurers we’ve given the Catholic Church ‘plausible deniability,’” said Press Secretary Jay Carney. “The Church itself will not be formally linked to the provision of services that it says violate its religious beliefs. No court can hold it culpable. The responsibility has been taken out of their hands.”
Carney further argued that “the insurers should be willing to comply because preventing births, by whatever means, reduces medical expenses. Birth control pills, condoms, abortifacients—all cost less than bearing, birthing, and raising a child. And that’s just the cost of medical expenses. When you add in the cost of food, clothing, education, and entertainment, it’s clear that every child brought into the world brings along a significant lifetime burden for both the parents and society. Reducing these costs is the president’s goal.”
Whether opponents of President Obama’s “compromise” will be mollified is questionable. Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ) called the so-called compromise “a ruse riddled with doublespeak and contradictions. Contrary to the president’s thinking, there are people in this country that take religious and moral obligations seriously. They cannot be bought off by a stratagem designed to give them ‘plausible deniability.’”
The President’s critics were “advised to accept the proffered compromise while it is still available,” Carney cautioned. “The president is not disposed to allow religious zealots to impede a women’s access to essential health services. He will protect this fundamental right by whatever methods are available to him.”
In related news, the American Civil Liberties Union sided with President Obama’s position on this issue. “The fundamental promise of religious liberty in this country doesn’t give one a right to refuse to pay for the health care needs of others,” ACLU spokeswoman Alicia Gay insisted. “So-called Freedom of thought is not the issue. People may continue to think whatever they want. But they must also obey the laws laid down by the president.”
Former House Speaker Flouts Ethics Rules
Despite strict rules prohibiting the solicitation of campaign donations from House office buildings, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) very publicly asked for contributions “to elect more reformers to Congress.”
Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill contended that no rules were broken because “she asked for contributions, not donations. Besides, the whole tenor of her pitch was to encourage people to help the Democratic Party gain more seats so they can clamp down on illegitimate abuses of the campaign finance regulations.”
Craig Holman, an advocate for campaign finance reform at the left-leaning Public Citizen lobby group, concurred with Hammill. “We regard Speaker Pelosi’s remarks as more of a policy statement than a direct solicitation,” Holman said. “She gave no indication of where people were to send money to help elect more Democrats. She merely asked for contributions in a very generic way. It’s not like we’re dealing with Republicans here. I think we can take her word for it that there was no intent to violate the ethics rules.”
Obama Strives to Overcome “Checks-and-Balances” Impediments to Change
President Barack Obama tried to console frustrated supporters by placing blame for the slow pace of change on the nation’s “founding fathers.”
“You and I know what needs to be done to bring social justice to every American,” the President observed. “But our enemies in Congress and the states are exploiting loopholes left in the Constitution by our nation’s early leaders. The requirement that laws must be approved by both houses of Congress enables obstructionists to block the mandate I received from voters in 2008. The autonomy granted the states under the Tenth Amendment insulates them from total compliance with national priorities I have established.”
A ray of hope for the president’s supporters was provided by his unilateral extension and amendment of the “No Child Left Behind” legislation. The original goal was to have all students become proficient in math and reading by 2014. It is apparent that this will not happen. Since 2007 Congress has been unable to agree on what to do regarding funding, standards and deadlines.
The President says he has decided to exempt 10 states from meeting the proficiency requirements. “The notion that a person must become proficient in math or reading in order to function in the modern world is mistaken,” Obama declared. “Today information is conveyed more effectively in pictures and sounds. Reading and writing are archaic skills no more necessary than the ability to hunt game for food.”
“And who really needs to know math?” the president asked. “We have computers, calculators and cash registers to do that for us. Insisting that students must comprehend math in order to graduate inflicts pure drudgery upon our youth.”
Exempted states will be permitted to use other standards to determine whether students are progressing satisfactorily in school. Obama urged that “higher, more honest standards be adopted as measures. I think the development of social consciousness in our young would be a higher goal for us to aim at than the simplistic mastery of out-dated and obsolete skills originally laid out by the ‘No Child Left Behind’ law.”
In related news, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg advised the newly elected Egyptian government to shun the U.S. Constitution as a model. “The US Constitution has too many impediments to successful governance,” Ginsburg warned. “The majority’s will is too easily thwarted by a minority. For example, despite your country’s overwhelming selection of Islamists in the recent election, if you were to adopt a U.S.-style Constitution you might be unable to enact sharia laws even if the vast majority desires it.”
Appeals Court Blocks California Ban on Same-Sex “Marriage”
The 9th Circuit Federal Appeals Court upheld District Court Judge Vaughn Walker’s overturning of the voter-approved amendment (Proposition 8) banning the state’s recognition of same-sex “marriage.”
“Voters have no right to amend their state’s constitution in ways that contradict clearly established federal policies,” the Court wrote in its decision. “To allow such ‘willy-nilly’ revisions on a state-by-state basis would lead to a patchwork of divergent laws across the nation. Things that are permitted in some states might be disallowed in others. Uniformity and equality of rights throughout the 50 states would be sacrificed to a misguided notion of state and personal autonomy. This is impermissible.”
Obama Flip-Flops on Super PAC Issue
Up to now, President Obama has railed against so-called “super PACs” that bundle money to conduct “independent” campaigns on behalf of favored candidates. But as his efforts to raise funds for his own campaign have bogged down he is urging his supporters to donate to “Priorities USA,” a super PAC led by two former Obama aides that is dedicated to his reelection.
“I wouldn’t call it a ‘flip-flop’ so much as a demonstration of nimble flexibility,” said Obama campaign spokesman David Axelrod. “I think it was Emerson who said that ‘consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.’ The President shouldn’t be expected to adhere to a stance that has lost its advantage for him.”
Axelrod said observation of how GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney has taken advantage of a super PAC to malign his rivals “has opened up a whole new vista of possibilities. Look, the candidate can’t be held accountable for what the super PAC does. It’s a perfect vehicle for negative campaigning against an opponent. Any accusation can be leveled—substantiated or not—and Romney was able to deflect responsibility by saying he doesn’t control what the PAC does. It’s ingenious.”
The super PAC “Restore Our Future” unleashed a barrage of negative ads that may have played a crucial role in Romney’s victory in the Florida GOP presidential primary late last month.
Flip-flopping on campaign strategy is nothing new for Obama. In 2008 he pledged to limit his campaign to the amounts available from the public financing pool. Once he got his opponent, Senator John McCain, to make a similar pledge Obama reneged, believing, accurately as it turned out, that McCain would feel honor-bound to keep his pledge. As a result, Obama was able to out spend McCain by a three to one ratio in the 2008 election.
Homeland Security on Lookout for “Militia Extremists”
A recently issued lexicon from the Department of Homeland Security warns law enforcement personnel to be on the lookout for what it calls “militia extremists.”
Militia extremists were described as “persons who exhibit an undue suspicion of government as manifested in statements that evince an inordinate reverence for the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, especially provisions protecting the rights to freedom of speech, bearing arms, and bars to so-called unreasonable search.”
Law enforcement officers were advised to “keep such persons under close surveillance” and to “not hesitate to act if they perceive a threat. Let’s not forget that the worst threats to our government may come from within.”
A Satirical Look at Recent News
Pearce Set for Legislative Race against RINO Crandall
KFYI Radio’s Ted Houston reports …
Former state Senate President Russell Pearce, who was defeated in a recall election in November, isn’t retiring from politics. He’s not even retiring from the state legislature, if things go according to his plan. Pearce, who previously represented Legislative District 18 (LD-18), has filed papers with the Arizona Secretary of State’s office to run as a candidate in the newly-redrawn LD-25, in which his Mesa home is now located. Pearce would challenge current Rep. Rich Crandall, a moderate Republican who has often been critical of, and disagreed with, Pearce’s stand on some issues. His filing for the seat comes just days after he was elected to a leadership post with the Arizona Republican Party.
Crandall was one of a handful of Republicans who participated with Democrats in a fundraiser two years ago and is seen as soft on the border invasion.
Burges Takes State Senate Seat Vacated by Bundgaard
The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors on MondayselectedArizona Rep. Judy Burges to fill the seat vacated by scandal-plagued Scott Bundgaard in the Arizona Senate from Legislative District 4 in Northwestern Maricopa County. Burges was one of three citizens nominated to the position by District 4 Republican Party precinct committeemen and the only incumbent lawmaker on the list. She was appointed on a unanimous 5-0 vote.
Burges, 68, a Sun City West resident, was first elected to the House in 2004. She is chairman of the House Government Committee and serves on the House Transportation Committee. She replaces former state Sen. Scott Bundgaard, who resigned earlier this month. Burges had indicated she will run for the state Senate in 2012.
“I have known Judy Burges and her husband Robert for many years,” commented Max Wilson, chairman of the board of supervisors and in whose supervisorial district the Senate district lies. “She is a veteran legislator and should hit the ground running. She has also been active in the community and in the Republican Party.”
Burges thanked the board for its vote of confidence and pledged “to work hard to serve our constituents.”
Burges holds two degrees from the University of Phoenix and has worked for Cyprus Bagdad Copper Company and in Yavapai County government. Her relocation from House to Senate created a ripple effect, and now state Republican officials plan to meet in District 4 to select nominees for Burges’s vacant House seat. The time and location will soon be announced by state GOP headquarters.
No to Tobin’s Gambling ‘Solution’: It’s Time for the State to Come of Age
The Center for Arizona Policy (CAP) and The Arizona Conservative are rising in opposition to a proposal by Arizona House Majority Whip Andy Tobin for a massive increase in legalized gambling in an attempt to fix the state budget. CAP President Cathi Herrod said: “During a tough economic time, it does not make sense to expand gambling when the social and economic costs of gambling outweigh the benefits by 3 to 1. If Mr. Tobin’s budget proposal passes, it would allow slots and table games at racetracks, which would ‘blow the caps’ on current gambling restrictions on Indian reservations. This likely would result in Phoenix and the entire state becoming virtually the next Las Vegas.”
The Arizona Conservative says: Arizona and other states need to realize that gambling breeds far more problems than it can ever possibly solve: bankrupting families, ruining marriages, compulsive gamblers driven to embezzle from their employers, benefiting organized crime, drying up the businesses in close proximity. All we’ve accomplished by proliferating gambling in Arizona is to swell the ranks of the membership of Gamblers Anonymous. What we haven’t accomplished is solving unemployment, crime, alcoholism and other social ills.
Instead of looking to the false hope of gambling, the Arizona Legislature needs to get real and cut spending. It was spending, by the Napolitano administration and misguided legislators, that created this huge budget problem. It’s time for the state to come of age and stop spending more of OUR money than it has
