PHOENIX—Republican representative Thomas Forese has introduced two pieces of legislation aimed at metal theft.
HB 2261 would amend the criminal code of the ARS 13-1820 concerning the theft of metals. A person would commit metal theft if “without lawful authority” the person knowingly:
1. Controls ferrous metal or nonferrous metal that is the property of another with the intent to deprive the other person of the metal.
2. Obtains ferrous metal or nonferrous metal that is the property of another by means of any material misrepresentation with intent to deprive the other person of the metal.
3. Comes into control of lost, mislaid or misdelivered ferrous metal or nonferrous metal that is the property of another under circumstances providing means of inquiry as to the true owner and appropriates the metal to the person’s own or another’s use without reasonable efforts to notify the true owner.
4. Controls ferrous metal or nonferrous metal that is the property of another knowing that the metal was stolen.
5. Unless acquired in the ordinary course of business by an automotive recycler or a scrap metal dealer, the inferences listed in section 13‑2305 apply to any prosecution under subsection A, paragraph 4 of this section.
Ferrous metal is defined as metals that will attract a metal while non-ferrous metal will not.
For the purposes of prosecution, the value of the metal would include the damage to the property from which the metal was stolen which occurs during the theft.
As an additional means of combating metal theft, the Legislator has also introduced HB 2262 which would amend sections of ARS Title 44 relating to the licensing and record keeping of scrap dealers in Arizona.
Currently scrap dealers are required to register with the Department of Public Safety and keep records of any transactions they make in metals exceeding $25. The new law would require them to keep records of all transactions.
It would also add certain records that scrap dealers must keep. It would also allow cities and counties to add regulations aimed at recovering the cost of enforcing this law.
DPS would also be required to submit a report every two years to the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House identifying all scrap dealers in the State of Arizona. All law enforcement officer in the state to register with a free web site that would send detailed descriptions of stolen items to scrap metal dealers and other law enforcement agencies within 100 miles of the theft.
PHOENIX—There are currently three bills for new vanity plates working their way through the Senate.
SB 1116 Creates a disabled veteran special plate if $32,000 is paid for its implementation to ADOT by December 31, 2013.
SB 1343 Creates a Girls’ Youth Organization special plate (GYO plate) if $32,000 is paid for its implementation to ADOT by December 31, 2013
SB 2025 Creates a Fallen Hero special plate if $32,000 is paid for its implementation to ADOT by December 31, 2013.
If Democrat Steve Farley has his way, they will take a new shape. In response to complaints that officers complaining about the difficulty seeing the letters, the Senator has introduced SB 1206. The bill would change 24-2405 to read:
A special plate issued pursuant to this article shall have a standard design with one area on the plate that is a three inch square that is set aside for a logo or message. The department shall determine the standard design of the special plate, and the logo or message is subject to the approval of the department. This section applies to all special plates that are authorized pursuant to this article after the effective date of this section.
The Senator has also introduced SB 1198 which is aimed at preventing obscuring the readablity of license plates with coatings or electronic means. The Bill would add Paragraph D to ARS 28-2354 reading:
Unless authorized by the department, a person shall not apply a covering or any substance to the license plate or use an electronic device or electrochromatic film that obscures from any angle the numbers, characters, year validating tabs or name of the jurisdiction issuing the plate.
While there is a penalty for covering up the name of the State on a license plate, the bill does not appear to provide a penalty for violating the proposed provision.
PHOENIX—There are four bills originating in the legislature of the Great State of Arizona from both sides of the aisle to benefit veterans in the State. Benefits would be in the area of employment, taxes, and lower hunting and fishing license fees.
Republican freshman Bob Thorpe of District 6 has introduced two bills. HB 2470(PDF) would create a Hiring Our Heroes award. He has also offered HB 2468(PDF) which would reduce hunting and fishing license fees for veterans.
HB 2470 would add 41-610 to Title 41, Article 7 (Department of Veterans’ Services) of the Arizona Revised Statute to read:
The department [of Veterans Affairs] shall develop and implement a hiring our heroes award to recognize Arizona businesses that provide job opportunities to veterans. The department shall hold an annual awards dinner to recognize Arizona businesses that have demonstrated a commitment to our returning soldiers. The department shall give the winning business a commendation, post the commendation on the department’s website and issue a press release praising the business.
HB 2468 would amend Title 17 of the Game and Fish laws to allow Game and Fish to offer reduced fees to veterans for fishing and hunting licenses. The Bill would amend 17-336 to allow the Game and Fish to reduced fees to honorably discharged veterans based on the number of years served. They would be able to reduce the fees by ten-percent for every four years of the veteran’s service in the military. This would also apply to members who served in the National Guard or a reserve component of the United States military. Those members would have to have been in Arizona for at least one-year prior to their application for the license.
Active duty military in the Great State of Arizona for thirty-days can purchase a residence license for hunting and fishing. The bill would allow them to apply for the same discount fees as the veterans above.
Justin Pierce, Republican from District , has introduced HB 2391 (PDF) which would amend to 43-1022 of the Arizona Revised Statue paragraph 38 which reads:
The full amount received as retired or retainer pay of the uniformed services of the United States by a taxpayer who is an honorably discharged veteran.
On the Democratic side of the aisle, Representative Mark Cardenas from District 19 proposes HB 2484(PDF) which has both Democrat and Republican cosponsors. The bill amends Title 38 and 43 of the A.R.S. concerning tax credits for hiring veterans.
HB 2484 would allow a tax credit for businesses who hire veterans (as defined in 41-601) for tax years from December 31, 2012 to December 31, 2015. The amount of the tax credit would be the lowest of the following:
(1) 10-percent of the salary earned and paid to the employee during the taxable year.
(2) Two-thousand dollars per employee.
(3) Four-thousand dollars for veterans who were honorably separated and has a service-connected disability or is receiving compensation or disability retirement benefits under the laws administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs or the armed services.
People who have a partnership in businesses that hire veterans could receive benefits based on their percentage of ownership.
Republicans in the Arizona legislature are submitting several bills aimed at protecting the rights of the citizens of Arizona. In their zeal of patriotism, however, two bills have been submitted concerning patriotic oaths that are causing concern.
Although one might question why one would be reluctant to take a patriotic oath of allegiance to the country, they may violate the First Amendment right of the individual. If they were to pass and somehow merit the signature of the governor, they would almost certainly wind up in the courts.
HB 2284, sponsored by Representative Steve Smith would require schools in grades one to twelve to set aside a specific time during the day in which students would be required to recite the Pledge of Allegiance unless their parents specifically request the pupil be excused.
According to AZCentral, Representative Smith said he introduced the legislation in response to a Maricopa high-school student who last year reported feeling mocked and embarrassed after she was the only one in her class to stand and say the pledge.
Making time for students who want to voluntarily say the Pledge should not pose a problem, but forcing them is raising First Amendment concerns.
Another bill raising constitutional eyebrows is sponsored by freshman Representative Bob Thorpe. HB 2467, would require students to take an oath to support and defend the Constitution similar to those required by public officials. In addition to passing the required course of instruction, the principle or head teacher of a school would have to certify in writing that the student performed the following oath:
I, _________, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge these duties; So help me God.
Representative Thorpe said that the intent was to inspire the students to further study the Constitution. He said, however, that he intends to change the wording of the bill to make it voluntary.
“Both bills are clearly unconstitutional, ironically enough,” said American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona Public Policy Director Anjali Abraham in the AZCentral article. “You can’t require students to attend school … and then require them to either pledge allegiance to the flag or swear this loyalty oath in order to graduate. It’s a violation of the First Amendment.”
PHOENIX — A former Arizona legislator will be sentenced Wednesday for his convictions on charges that he solicited and accepted a bribe while he was a Tempe city councilman.
Former Rep. Ben Arredondo was also convicted on charges that he misled donors about a scholarship fund to benefit his relatives.
He had pleaded guilty in October to honest services wire fraud, the technical charge for bribery that is often used in public corruption cases.
In a major step towards global centralization of election processes, the world’s dominant Internet voting company has purchased the USA’s dominant election results reporting company.
When you view your local or state election results on the Internet, on portals which often appear to be owned by the county elections division, in over 525 US jurisdictions you are actually redirected to a private corporate site controlled by SOE software, which operates under the name ClarityElections.com.
The good news is that this firm promptly reports precinct-level detail in downloadable spreadsheet format. As reported by BlackBoxVoting.org in 2008, the bad news is that this centralizes one middleman access point for over 525 jurisdictions in AL, AZ, CA, CO, DC, FL, KY, MI, KS, IL, IN, NC, NM, MN, NY, SC, TX, UT, WA. And growing.
As local election results funnel through SOE’s servers (typically before they reach the public elsewhere), those who run the computer servers for SOE essentially get “first look” at results and the ability to immediately and privately examine vote details throughout the USA.
Open primaries may drive Legislature to special session
PHOENIX—The media is a-buzz with the initiative filed by Jack Biltis—with more than 320,000 signatures—which would allow Arizona citizens to, “to reject any federal action that they determine violates the United States Constitution.” This initiative comes on the heels of a referendum from the Legislature where we may see Arizona voters proclaim, “SOVEREIGN AND EXCLUSIVE AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION OVER THE AIR, WATER, PUBLIC LANDS, MINERALS, WILDLIFE AND OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES”
According to the Arizona Daily Sun, the measure submitted by Jack Biltis is not just in response to the recent Supreme Court ruling on the takeover of the health care industry by the Obama administration, but the Bush PATRIOT act, as well.
“The only portion of government that has unlimited powers are the state governments and the people themselves,” Biltis is quoted as saying.
A referendum that was submitted to the Secretary of State by Republican members of the House and Senate is now Proposition 120. The bill is a response to Governor Jan Brewer vetoing several State sovereignty bills. Continue reading →
ARIZONA—The primary elections to select those candidates for the November ballot will be held August 28th. Candidates include federal, State legislative and county offices. Although the primaries are to select individuals from the major parties, Independents and Non-Partisan voters may vote in the primaries on that day. The procedure is simple. Voters registered as Independent and Non-Partisan can go to the polls and request a ballot for either of the established parties. The exception is the Libertarian party which has chosen to hold a closed primary election.
Federal offices
As of this writing the Democrats have one candidate for the office of United States Senator to replace retiring Senator Jon Kyl. Richard Carmona of Tuscon is the Democratic candidate.
The Libertarians have Sheila Bilyeu of Flagstaff running for the vacancy.
The Republicans have five hopefuls. Representative Jeff Flake and Wil Cardon of Mesa received the most petition signatures and the choice of the Republicans will probably be one of those. The other choices include Bryan Hackbarth of Peoria, Clair Ban Steenwyk of Buckeye—both of whom are on the ballot having received requisite petition signatures. John Lyon of Glendale is registered as a write-in candidate so those voting for him can write his name in the appropriate slot on the ballot.
Senator Kyl will narrowly escapes a recall attempt by Leonard Clark of Phoenix who has filed recall petitions against Jan Brewer and Carl Seel.
For Representative for Congressional District 1 the Democrats will select between Wenona Benally Baldenegro of Flagstaff and former Representative Ann Kirkpatrick.
The Libertarians have Anthony Prowell of Tuscon on the ballot.
The Republicans will have a choice of Patrick Gatti of Show Low, Jonathan Paton from Oro Valley and Wade Douglas, a business man from Sedona. Gaither Martin survived a court challenge by Jonathan Paton and is still on the ballot.
State Offices
As of this writing, Arizona Legislative District 6 will choose between Democrat Tom Chabin of Flagstaff and Republican Chester Crandell from Heber, Arizona—the only two candidates for State Senator.
For Representative for District 6 the Democrats will choose Doug Ballard of Parks and Angela Lefevre of Sedona. The Republicans will place Brenda Barton and Bob Thorpe as their candidates. Continue reading →
Phoenix—While Arizona may win its battle over the watered-down SB 1070 due to the efforts of Governor Jan Brewer, the governor vetoed several other measures which the Legislature passed to enforce State sovereignty and the Tenth Amendment to the Bill of Rights. Among those were measures to prevent State agencies from enforcing provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act, a measure supporting county Sheriffs, and objections to international forces on American soil.
Vetoed by the governor was SCR 1008 and SB 1081 which would have given authority to the State and counties to declare emergencies in the forests and take action to clean them up. The governor recently signed the Four Forest Restoration contract with the “National Forest Service.” A main problem with this contract is that any money taken in from the resources leave Arizona.
The governor vetoed Senate Bill 1332 to demand that the federal government extinguish title to all public lands in the State relinquishing title to Arizona. In her veto letter she stated that the bill, “…appears to be in conflict with Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 and Article VI, Clause 2, as well as the Enabling Act.”
The first article mentioned is one that the federal government uses in their arguments.
“The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.”
While a Territory, it was constitutionally legitimate to form a “forest service.” With the Enabling Act mentioned—which allowed Arizona to form a Constitution—and the signing of that Constitution by William Howard Taft, Arizona is no longer a territory and this provision no longer applies.
The Constitution of the United States allows for certain properties for the federal government “To establish Post Offices and post roads” (I, Sect. 8, Clause 7), and the Seat of Government (3) and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature (4) for the Erection of Forts, (5) Magazines, (6) Arsenals, (7) dock-Yards, and (8) other needful Buildings (Article I, Sect. 8, Clause 17). None of these purposes gives Congress the right to form a National Forest Service, National Parks Service or other Bureaus to control lands within a State. The exception is waterways to ensure they are navigable. The federal government also argues Fifth Amendment authority to confiscate public and private land at will, but the Fifth Amendment was only meant to allow them to take land for their limited, allotted purposes. Article VI, Clause 2 is the so-called “Supremacy Clause.” This clause was only meant to give the federal government authority over those areas they were specifically given authority over by the Constitution of the United States. The wording of the Tenth Amendment of the Bill of Rights was meant to make that very clear.
Also in Article IV of the Constitution is a provision that gives the federal government the specific duty to protect the State from invasion. Article I, Section 10, Clause 3 and Title 32 §109 of the United States Code gives Arizona the authority to establish a defense force for the purposes of protecting Arizona citizens from invasion. Despite the claim of PBS, the Mexican drug cartels are known to be working with Hezbollah and Fox News has reported concerns by the Department of Homeland Security that they may be working with the terrorist group al-Qaeda. SB-1083 originally would have set up an Arizona Defense Force. A choir of Arizona media led by Senator Steve Gallardo (D-13) accused Arizona of setting up a “vigilante” group displaying their apparent ignorance to the definition of a vigilante group. One television media outlet said that the bill would hand guns out to untrained citizens and send them to the border. They did not mention the training, psychological testing, vetting process and command structure written into the bill. The bill was later changed by the author, Senator Sylvia Allen (R-5), in response to the concerns to create an Arizona Special Missions Unit. The governor did not have a chance to veto this bill which was killed in committee by House Speaker Andy Tobin.
Governor vetoed SB 1182 which would have prevented the State and any State agency from providing material support in implementation of Sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act. Despite the assurances by Representative Allen West of Florida, many groups advocate that these sections do not exempt American citizens from being apprehended by the military as “terrorists” without trial and being held indefinitely.
In an e-mail, Senator Allen wrote that the governor, “…said it was wrong to force law enforcement to have to decide rather to enforce state law over federal law. She was more worried about law enforcement than the citizens of this state who longer have due process under the Constitution, which by the way, law enforcement took an oath to uphold. The Governor was wrong on this one.”
The governor also vetoed HB 2434 which would have required federal law enforcement officers to notify the Sheriff of a county before conducting operations within their county. In the veto letter by the governor she wrote, “Rather than hinder the efforts of our federal law enforcement colleagues, we need to focus on collaboration. For example, the Arizona Counter-Terrorism Intelligence Center brings together local, state and federal law enforcement to jointly fight against terrorism and other serious crimes.” Apparently this does not consist of preventing terrorists from entering the country.
Recent news reports are that Russian troops are training in Colorado at the Denver Airport to fight terrorists (See Right-wing Extremist document). HJR 2001, proposed by Representative Harper (R-4) and Senator Gould (R-3) was written prior to that knowledge and opposes the use of international force in America to enforce unratified treaties and authorizes resistance against any international force infringing on the United States Constitution. The governor said, “Many terms are undefined or ill-defined which leaves this measure vulnerable to misuse, confusion and unintended consequences.”
The Resolution only shows Legislative support for the Constitutional right of American citizens to resist foreign invasion as granted by Article I, Section 10, Clause 3 aforementioned, and the Second Amendment (See Federalist Paper No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 24, 25 & 29 ) the Ninth and Tenth Amendment of the Bill of Rights.
Justice Noah Haynes Swayne in the Cherokee Tobacco Case (78 u.s. 616, 20 L.Ed. 227, 11 Wall. 616 (1870)) wrote, “It need hardly be said that a treaty. cannot change the Constitution or be held valid if it be in violation of that instrument.” That sentiment was upheld by Justice Horace Gray who authored the decision in UNITED STATES v. WONG KIM ARK, 169 U.S. 649, 18 S.Ct. 456, 42 L.Ed. 890 (March 28, 1898), “…as will appear by tracing the history of the statutes, treaties, and decisions upon that subject, always bearing in mind that statutes enacted by congress, as well as treaties made by the president and senate, must yield to the paramount and supreme law of the constitution.”
In 1913, Elihu Root published his lecture Essentials of the Constitution in which he wrote, “The constitution provides that ‘This constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.’ Under this provision an enactment by Congress not made in pursuance of the constitution, or an enactment of a state contrary to the constitution, is not a law. Such an enactment should strictly have no more legal effect than the resolution of any private debating society.”
Who hasn’t wished they were or played cowboy as a kid? The cowboy has always been a fixture in the collective memory of Americans. Cowboys have actually existed in several countries, but the American cowboy through movies continues to be the image that sparks the imagination. Many small communities, such as Williams, has a cowboy show that attracts tourists from around the world. Now you will be able to release that fantasy one day this year.
Arizona Senate Resolution 1006 voted on unanimously supports National Day of the Cowboy on Saturday July 28th.
The resolution recognizes the pioneering and patriotic spirit of the cowboy. The Cowboy, the resolution states, embodies honesty, integrity, courage, compassion and determination.
Rodeos draw 30,000,000 fans from around the world. The first is said to have been held in Prescott, Arizona in 1888 when a group of cowboys got together to display their talents.
