Legislators need to finally step up, protect vulnerable Arizona children

(PNI) Regarding "CPS crisis deepens" (Republic, Friday):

I have lived in Phoenix since 1974, and nothing for the better has changed at Child Protective Services. While this angers me, it doesn't surprise me.

There is plenty of blame to go around, but, ultimately, it is time for the legislators of our state to get their stuff together and do something to fix this ongoing problem. The children in our state are depending on them to protect them.

So far, they have not done the job.

--Bruce J. Parkhouse, Phoenix

Where is CPS oversight group?

A photo with the article "CPS crisis deepens" on Friday shows at least nine members of an overstaffed oversight committee on Child Protective Services.

Oversight? Where have you been?

--J.B. Shevlin, Payson

New approach to CPS required

The children of Arizona deserve better. We must improve Child Protective Services.

That requires an independent agency, led by an exceptional, dedicated professional who will attend to the morale and resilience of the staff. This is the most emotionally demanding work imaginable: faced daily with life-and-death decisions, caught up in intense and sometimes frightening disputes, and double-bound by the state mandate for family preservation and the humane goal of child protection.

While working closely with police, it should not be a part of an already overstretched public-safety agency.

We need to recognize that there are not enough alternatives available, as foster services are insufficient to compensate for the number of family failures. Poverty is frequently a factor in family breakdown, and as income disparity increases, more and more families live with fewer resources.

We should look for leadership out of state.

--H.G. Whittington, Sun City West

Senate rule change is ill-advised

Regarding "Senate Dems limit GOP use of filibusters" (Republic, Friday):

Changing the Senate rules, which have existed nearly since the beginning of our nation, to remove the option of some filibusters is a radical step that shows the lengths President Barack Obama and the left will go to achieve their revolutionary agenda.

The rules protected the rights of minorities, a very central theme implicit in much of what our founders created. They wanted to ensure that elections could not create a tyranny of the majority, especially after what they experienced as British subjects. The Senate and its rules were a salient aspect of those protections.

President Obama and the Democrats used deceit on "Obamacare" and Benghazi, Libya, to pass the law and to steal an election. The electorate was fooled into believing, so the Democrats in power pushed their agenda. Now that the public sees through the lies and the administration has lost public support, it is abusing its power to change the rules, so it can continue to force upon Americans a revolution they do not want.

The radical left doesn't care that its policies don't work for America. The left, specifically in the persons of President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, will go to any lengths to win, to force their ideology and will upon all of us, no matter what we want.

--Dennis Santillo, Cornville

Rule for in-flight cellphone calls

Any change allowing cellphone calls in flight should be accompanied by isolated grouped seating, so that callers could be limited to annoying each other.

--Dale Woods, Prescott

Filibuster change is far overdue

The filibuster was part of the Senate rules back in the days of the new republic, when transportation was slow, to allow senators to delay a bill and let other senators of their party to arrive to vote. The filibuster has been used and abused by partisan politics by both parties to the detriment to the American people.

President George W. Bush and his Republican Senate were given the mandate by the electorate to govern. President Barack Obama and the Democratic Senate are given the mandate by the electorate to govern. The abuse of the filibuster has reduced and often stopped both administrations from their ability to govern this country.

We are the only democracy in the world that requires 60percent of a body to vote to pass appointments or legislation. All other democracies only need 51percent to do the same. This is not the will of the people. I, as well as many others, I'm sure, am sick and tired of the stagnation in Congress, and in their partisan refusal to do their job.

Thank God there is the courage to put the filibuster to rest, and when the Republican Party is in control of the presidency and the Senate, they need to keep it at rest so they may govern as the electorate intended.

--Richard Ward, Phoenix

Ariz. pension fund has no shame

Arizona's Public Safety Personnel Retirement System's board approved last week retroactive pay raises and an inflation adjustment for some investment-staff members.

Government entities are making large contributions, and retirees had their cost-of-living raises suspended. The fund has done very poorly for several years. On the other hand, even the Arizona State Retirement System, which pays its staff less, has done a much better job. How does this kind of thing keep going on? Have they no shame?

--Barb Montgomery, Phoenix

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Health law's troubles give Republicans boost

WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON The health care law's problems are giving congressional Republicans a much-needed boost of energy, helping them to move past the government-shutdown debacle and focus on a theme for next year's congressional elections.

Republicans are back on offense, and more quickly than many had expected, after seeing their approval ratings plunge during last month's partial federal government shutdown and worrisome talk of a possible U.S. debt default.

They pillory administration officials at Capitol Hill hearings. They cite the millions of people getting dropped by insurers despite President Barack Obama's promise that it wouldn't happen. They harp on the program's flawed website enrollment process.

Now they're relishing Obama's apology to those who are losing health insurance plans he had repeatedly said they could keep.

"If the president is truly sorry for breaking his promises to the American people, he'll do more than just issue a halfhearted apology on TV," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement.

'This is going to be a big issue'

Republicans once pinned their health care criticisms largely on computer glitches in the application and enrollment process. Today, they're accusing Obama and congressional Democrats of much worse, including deceit and incompetence.

Conservative groups are pouring money into ad campaigns reminding voters that many Democrats had promised Americans they could keep their current insurance policies if they wanted. In particular, Republicans hope these efforts will help them with women, who tend to vote Democratic and often make health care decisions for their families.

In the 2014 elections, "this is going to be a big issue, and it's not going away," said Daniel Scarpinato of the National Republican Congressional Committee. "Democrats who voted for Obamacare," he said, "are pretty desperately running around with their hair on fire, trying to distance themselves, which they're not going to be able to do."

The White House says canceled policies can be replaced with better coverage, sometimes at lower prices. What the administration doesn't emphasize is that better coverage often costs more, and those looking for new policies may not qualify for the tax subsidies available under the new law.

Activists feel 'spring in step'

Brad Dayspring, a spokesman for the Republican Party's top Senate campaign group, acknowledged that the party took a hit last month when an angry public blamed them for the 16-day partial government shutdown.

But now, he said, "there's a spring in the step" of party activists.

Potential congressional candidates "who might have been 50-50 about running for office might be a little more inclined" to plunge in, he said.

Best of all, Dayspring said, the most vulnerable Democratic lawmakers have echoed Obama's now-disproven promises about insurance cancellations and "most of them are on film doing it."

Republicans must pick up six Senate seats next year to gain control for the first time in eight years. If they prevent Democrats from gaining 17 net House seats, they will sustain the Republican House majority they won in 2010.

Dayspring said the law's problems will help his party combat Democrats' claim that Republicans are engaged in a "war on women" on matters such as access to contraceptives.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

It's clear immigration laws aren't working

If you've ever discussed immigration reform with a friend, neighbor, relative or co-worker, you've probably heard someone say we should just enforce the laws we already have on the books. It's the same line we hear about preventing gun violence, cleaning up our environment, keeping workers safe on the job and preventing workplace discrimination.

The thing is, it's not true.

Our current laws created the mess we have now.

Our problem isn't that we're not enforcing our laws; it's that our laws are out of date and often impractical or unenforceable. It's comforting to believe we could solve everything by hiring more law-enforcement agents, but that would barely scratch the surface.

If you believe immigration reform boils down to an enforcement question, consider the likely results of a nationwide crackdown. If we deported every one of the estimated 11million undocumented immigrants in this country, it would wreak havoc on the legal economy -- the loss of customers and the families suddenly without breadwinners would be just the start. No increase in Border Patrol spending will change that.

Besides, we've thrown money at the problem before and it hasn't made a difference. Border Patrol enforcement costs keep going up, but the agency's reported number of annual apprehensions has been decreasing steadily for years. The cost to taxpayers per apprehension has skyrocketed from $238 in 1990 to $10,431 in 2011, according to Business Insider. Are we happier with the results?

Undocumented immigration to the United States has slowed more or less to zero. The major policy question we're facing today isn't how to stop more immigration; it's how best to respond to the presence of the millions of people already here.

The solution is to create a reasonable earned-pathway system for undocumented workers to come into compliance and start to work legally in this country. Spending billions of dollars on get-tough fantasies is not going to happen, and it would be a disaster if it ever did.

Just as importantly, the "enforce the laws we have" rallying cry ignores huge opportunities that we as a country should be taking advantage of. The Senate reform bill passed earlier this year increases the number of U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers by 3,500 over the next four years, which the University of Southern California found would create more than 115,000 new jobs and add $7billion to the U.S. economy annually. That's a big improvement that needs to be made today.

Unfortunately, prominent figures such as House Speaker John Boehner and Texas Gov. Rick Perry have decided that running out the clock on immigration reform is better for the Republican Party than addressing our country's needs.

As Perry said at the Republican Governors Association meeting in Arizona last month, "I think immigration reform is going to be very passé." Boehner said Nov.13 that on his watch, the House won't negotiate at all with the Senate on the issue.

That's not a political gamble. It's a total failure of leadership.

No one thinks our system works well right now. Even if you disagree with the efforts of comprehensive-reform advocates, you probably don't think we're living in the best of all possible worlds today. The status quo has no serious defenders, but it's exactly what Boehner, Perry and their friends are keeping in place.

Everyone should be able to agree that they want a better immigration system than the one we have now.

We can disagree about what that would look like, but it's important to move past the "enforce the laws we have" talking point.

It keeps us from having the serious conversation we need to have about what to change and how.

U.S. Rep. Raúl Grijalva, a Democrat, represents Arizona's 3rd Congressional District.

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

<nbsp/> Cooperation can help get things done

On the morning of Dec. 8, 1984, Arizona native John R. Norton III entered the West Wing of the White House and was greeted by Robert "Bob" Tuttle, President Ronald Reagan's director of personnel. Reagan had asked the Arizona agribusiness titan to serve as deputy secretary of Agriculture.

Norton III, a Republican, accepted the president's offer, and his name was placed before the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry. The Senate, at the time, was controlled by

the Democrats, and Norton III expressed trepidation about his potential "grilling."

Significantly, Arizona's entire congressional delegation rallied around its native son. Junior Sen. Dennis DeConcini, a Democrat, hosted a reception at his McLean, Va., home, where he introduced Norton III and his wife, Doris, to Democratic senators on the committee. DeConcini's wife's family, the Hurleys, were long acquainted with the Nortons through their family enterprises and their political affiliation with Arizona's growing and increasingly influential Republican Party. Of course, senior Sen. Barry Goldwater supported Norton III's confirmation.

From the House of Representatives, Arizona's delegation -- Morris Udall, a Democrat, and Republicans John McCain, Eldon Rudd and Jim Kolbe -- prepared statements in Norton III's behalf.

Udall, in characteristic fashion, offered an amusing comment but left no doubt about his support for his fellow Arizonan: "John is an unusually well-qualified person, and he is superior to everyone I know. I do not know why anyone in his right mind would want to take on this job, but the country is lucky that he is, and you will make no mistake if you confirm his nomination."

That snapshot in my new book, "The Norton Trilogy," represents another Arizona and another time, when the public's interest and civility were part and parcel of the political process.

Though contrasting ideologies and partisanship existed in the 1980s, the political atmosphere was less toxic. Differences were noted, respected, and after 5 p.m., ideological fealty remained at work. Congressmen and senators from differing parties socialized and dined together. The bipartisanship exemplified in Norton III's successful nomination in 1985 has receded into history.

Two political giants who respected each other and their respective pioneer families, Democrat Carl Hayden and Goldwater, set the tone for the bipartisan support reflected in Norton III's confirmation hearings. Shortly before his retirement from the Senate, Goldwater spoke of Hayden.

"Let me put it this simple way," he stated flatly, "whenever my service in the Senate is terminated, I hope that my service to the country and my state equals a small fraction of what Carl Hayden has provided in both areas," adding, "Carl Hayden outgrew party personality early in his political career."

Though bipartisanship is one of several themes that runs through "The Norton Trilogy," the book is also a study of the roles that federal reclamation, law, politics and individual initiative played in the settlement and growth of this often unforgiving region of the country. In short, this volume is a rumination on the history of water and agribusiness in the American Southwest through the lives

of three generations of John R. Nortons.

The work details the earliest efforts at irrigated agriculture in the 19th century through the monumental Arizona vs. California Supreme Court case that helped determine where the life-giving waters of the Colorado River would be divided and into the critical events that have shaped the late 20th century and early 21st. The Nortons were at the center of these and other developments that made Arizona into a vital population and agricultural center.

Pioneers such as John R. Norton (1854-1923), who was one of three members of the legendary Breakenridge Survey of 1889 that located the site of what became Roosevelt Dam, and John R. Norton Jr. (1901-87), who, by the 1930s emerged as one of Arizona's leading agriculture producers and livestock growers, shaped the very landscape of the western United States.

And John R. Norton III built upon the accomplishments of his father and grandfather to become one of the region's major agribusiness entrepreneurs, deputy secretary of the Department of Agriculture in the Reagan administration, and one of the West's leading philanthropists in education, health care and the arts.

The Nortons, moreover, reflected the region's evolution in politics from the late 19th century to the early 21st. Norton Sr., a Kentucky native who moved West, was a southern Democrat who won election to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and sought to rival Hayden in turn-of-the-century Democratic Party caucuses.

Norton Jr., not as politically active as father or son, nevertheless expressed his "Pinto Democrat" leanings when he chaired the "Democrats for Wilkie" effort in the 1940 presidential election. He was well on his way to Republican registration.

And Norton III, perhaps the most active and astute of the three in political affairs, continues to champion conservative causes.

As former Sen. DeConcini stated recently, "The Norton family reaches back in the history of Arizona as far as the Udalls, Goldwaters, Babbitts and DeConcinis, and this family and its accomplishments serve as an historical metaphor for the growth and development of Arizona and the Greater Southwest for the past 150 years."

Bruce Babbitt, former Arizona governor and secretary of the Interior Department, added a more personal observation: "During my years as governor, John R. Norton III was my go-to Republican. Working together, we discovered a lot of common ground for making water policy and promoting agriculture. The remarkable history of three Norton generations should help us understand and renew bipartisan cooperation."

Beyond the Nortons serving as exemplars of a more civil and dignified political culture, former Republican Sen. Jon Kyl, who penned a robust foreword to "The Norton Trilogy," correctly asserts that "the Nortons have made Arizona and the nation a better place," and their intergenerational legacy "is as much an American story as it is an Arizona one."

In contrast to current political vitriol and divisiveness, Arizona residents can look back upon a long history of political evolution and change, vigorous and productive political debate, and, in several significant instances, bipartisan cooperation and support from its political leaders.

Reaching across the aisle to find common ground has been a part of Arizona's political history, and, in the best of all worlds, its future.

Jack August Jr. is a visiting scholar in legal history at Snell & Wilmer. His new book, "The Norton Trilogy," is the latest of several books he has written about the American West.

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

GOP's Pullen running for treasurer

Randy Pullen, former head of the state Republican Party, announced his candidacy Thursday for the GOP nomination for state treasurer.

Pullen is touting his financial credentials, in both private and political circles, as he wades into what is now a four-candidate field for the August 2014 Republican primary.

He is a certified public accountant and served as treasurer of the Republican National Committee from 2009-11.

Pullen also has a background in data systems for financial institutions. He oversaw the installation of the state's financial-information system three decades ago when he worked for Deloitte Touche. With that ailing system slated for replacement in 2015, he said, he's well-positioned to reprise that oversight role. "If they're going to change out the accounting system in 2015, who better to oversee it?" he asked.

Pullen said he has spent months building a statewide team, talking up his trio of campaign chairmen: former Gov. Fife Symington, Mohave County Supervisor Buster Johnson and Pima County Supervisor Ray Carroll.

Also running in the Republican primary for the treasurer's seat are Jeff DeWit, president and CEO of echotrade, a day-trading investment company; former Tempe Mayor Hugh Hallman; and former Chandler City Councilman Martin Sepulveda.

Current Treasurer Doug Ducey is seeking the GOP nomination for governor in 2014.

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

GOP governors talk immigration reform

Republican governors who gathered in Phoenix last week for their annual conference did their best to distance themselves from their congressional GOP counterparts and Capitol Hill political dysfunction.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie cited immigration reform as an example of Washington's failure to deal with major issues.

Speaking Thursday at a news conference at the Republican Governors Association meeting at the Phoenician resort, Christie said the broken U.S. immigration system "has an effect on the people of our states, on the economies of our states" and needs a solution.

Christie declined to endorse specifics of a legislative remedy, such as a pathway to citizenship for most of the estimated 11million undocumented immigrants who have settled in the United States. He said it is up to President Barack Obama and Congress to figure out a compromise, just as he has to do in dealing with the Democrat-controlled New Jersey Legislature.

"The inaction down there on this problem, a problem that we've all seen for years, is just unacceptable," Christie said. "They've got work to do. Get to work and start to fix the problems."

Christie, who earlier this month won a second term in his traditional blue state, is a top GOP presidential prospect for 2016. He was the focus of most of the media attention at the four-day RGA conference, which also included a surprise Thursday appearance by former President George W. Bush at a private governors lunch. Also on Thursday, Christie became RGA chairman for the 2014 election year, a role that will give him additional national exposure.

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, whose parents came from India, shared Christie's sense of urgency about the immigration situation. The Democrat-controlled U.S. Senate this year passed a comprehensive bipartisan reform package, but it was declared dead on arrival in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. Though House Republicans have talked for months about acting on a series of smaller immigration-related bills, none has come to the floor this year.

"At some point, D.C. needs to actually do something, say something," said Haley, who also did not offer an opinion on details such as a path to citizenship. "It is causing a divide across this country, the longer they put off making a decision."

Others at the Phoenix gathering offered varying views on immigration reform.

Some, such as Texas Gov. Rick Perry, Florida Gov. Rick Scott and Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, advocated for securing the border first, which for years has been a common Republican refrain.

"You could do a 21st-century, modern, guest-worker program without amnesty and solve the problem going forward for this country," added Pence, a former U.S. representative.

Perry, who unsuccessfully sought the 2012 GOP presidential nomination, predicted that the immigration-reform discussion will eventually resolve itself due to energy-policy reforms that he suggests will reinvent Mexico's economy. Mexicans now living without authorization in the United States will go home to better jobs, he said.

"Listen, I think the issue is you secure the border first and then you can have the conversation about immigration reform," Perry said Wednesday. "And, again, I think immigration reform is going to be very passé. It's going to be part of the past."

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, another possible 2016 candidate, complained that Republicans in Washington, D.C., too often are "defined as the party of 'no'" and called for the GOP to do a better job "offering detailed, principled solutions to the issues the American people care about."

When asked if the House Republicans missed an opportunity to offer a GOP immigration solution, Jindal said he won't participate in what he deemed "Republican fratricide." But he said "plenty of Republicans in D.C." are frustrated and agree they should be doing more on immigration and other big issues.

"You can get all sorts of Republicans to criticize other Republicans. I'm not interested in that," Jindal said. "I am interested in saying, and I do think, that absolutely, as the Republican Party, we need to be advancing solutions."

Christie and Haley both indicated that they would not hesitate to criticize Capitol Hill Republicans if criticism is merited.

"I think there are no saints in Washington right now," Haley said. "Republicans and Democrats have royally screwed this up."

For that reason, Haley said the next Republican presidential standard-bearer should come from the ranks of the governors, not Congress.

"What I always think is important are results, and it's really hard for somebody out of D.C. to prove results when they can't even stay open," she said, in an apparent reference to the recent partial federal government shutdown.

Ohio Gov. John Kasich, another potential White House contender, also said the GOP's strength lies with the governors.

"You know, it's pretty interesting, isn't it, that people talk about the Republican brand and what people tend to forget is we've got 30 Republican governors," Kasich said Wednesday. "There's not a better way to figure out who people favor than to look inside the states."

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who also is widely viewed as a possible 2016 GOP hopeful, did not attend the conference.

Nowicki is The Republic's national political reporter.

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Gay-rights advocates woo Flake, McCain

WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON Sens. Jeff Flake and John McCain could be key in determining the fate of a bill that would ban employment discrimination against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender workers.

The Arizona Republicans are among six GOP senators being lobbied heavily by supporters of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. The bill's supporters appear to be close to securing the 60 votes needed to prevent a filibuster. A vote to proceed to debate on the bill is scheduled for tonight, potentially setting up a vote to approve it later in the week.

On Thursday, Arizona volunteers delivered more than 3,200 postcards and letters to McCain's and Flake's Phoenix offices urging the senators to vote for the proposed law. Supporters said they also have made more than 1,100 phone calls to the senators. Their efforts will continue until the vote.

"Our goal is to really show that the support is there for this issue among Senator McCain's and Senator Flake's constituents," said Dan Rafter of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest gay-rights group.

The bill would bar employers from using a person's sexual orientation or gender identity as the basis for hiring, firing, promotion or salary decisions.

Flake supported a narrower version of the bill in 2007 when he was serving in the House. That bill did not include transgender workers. It passed the House 235-184 in 2007 but died in the Senate.

This time, Flake said he will oppose the legislation.

"Unlike a 2007 version of this bill, which I supported, the Senate bill includes new provisions that will increase the potential for litigation and compliance costs, especially for small businesses," Flake said in a written statement. "For that reason, I oppose the Senate bill."

McCain has not yet decided how to vote, although an aide says he's leaning toward opposing the bill unless it is amended. The aide said McCain worries that the bill could lead to "lawsuit abuse by trial lawyers" and whether it adequately exempts religious schools and charities from having to hire gay employees if doing so would conflict with their religious beliefs.

A September poll by Republican pollster Alan Lundry indicated about 63 percent of Arizonans support the proposed law.

"One thing we've found in conversations is that Arizonans see this as sort of a matter of the golden rule -- treating others as you would want to be treated," Rafter said. "No one would want to lose a job because of who they are."

To tap into that sentiment, the bipartisan Americans for Workplace Opportunity coalition sent three full-time field organizers to Arizona to lead the postcard-writing effort and organize phone banks to lobby Flake and McCain. The field workers have been in the state since August, shortly after the measure was approved by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. Arizona is one of seven states where the coalition has focused its efforts.

The challenge for the bill's supporters is that the Republican senators they are hoping to attract may worry about a challenge from the right in a GOP primary if they vote for the bill, said Jack Pitney, a political scientist at Claremont McKenna College in California.

"There are social conservatives in the Republican Party who would oppose just about any gay-rights legislation, so there is a political cost," Pitney said. "On the other hand, non-discrimination laws do not generate as much opposition as same-sex marriage bills. There are conservative Republicans, both in the electorate and among politicians, who don't support gay marriage but do support non-discrimination. They are very different issues."

Pitney said Republicans who oppose the law risk losing the support of younger voters.

"Younger people -- even those who are conservative -- are much more likely to embrace gay rights than older people, particularly on the issue of non-discrimination," he said. "And as societal attitudes continue to change on the issue, Republicans could risk alienating voters in the general election if they oppose this law."

The Senate's 53 Democrats and two independents -- led by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. -- have all come out in favor of the bill.

Two Republicans -- Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Mark Kirk of Illinois -- also support the legislation. But two Republicans who voted for it in committee -- Sens. Orrin Hatch of Utah and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska -- have indicated that their support is now uncertain.

That leaves advocates for the law about three votes shy of the 60 votes they need to overcome a filibuster in the Senate.

If it passes the Democrat-led Senate, though, the legislation would face steep odds in the Republican-controlled House.

In addition to Flake and McCain, the Republican senators the Human Rights Campaign and its allies have focused on are: Dean Heller of Nevada, Rob Portman of Ohio, Patrick Toomey of Pennsylvania and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire.

Opponents of the bill say they also have been in touch with Flake,McCain and other key senators to try to convince them that the proposed law would hurt businesses and infringe on religious liberty.

"Business will be hit with more litigation costs if this bill passes," said Peter Sprigg, senior fellow for public-policy research at the conservative Family Research Council, which opposes gay rights and abortion rights. "When you add a new protected category to the law, you are giving a license to sue to a whole group of people who didn't have it previously."

But advocates of the bill say there has been no significant increase in litigation in states that have passed anti-discrimination laws. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has adopted a "neutral" position on the legislation.

The Human Rights Campaign cites a 2013 report by the Government Accountability Office that showed "relatively few" employment-discrimination cases in the 21 states that have laws barring employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. On average, claims based on sexual orientation or gender identity were about 3 to 4 percent of the total number of employment-discrimination claims, the report said.

The Family Research Council doesn't believe that gays need to be protected from discrimination the way that racial minorities or women do, Sprigg said. "Most employers don't discriminate against employees based on sexual orientation because they have no way of knowing their orientation unless they declare it," he said. "It's an invisible characteristic; it's not like race or gender. For the vast majority of employers, they are not going to consider sexual orientation a relevant factor."

Those that do consider it relevant -- such as churches, Christian bookstores and other groups and businesses with religious affiliations -- should not be forced to hire gays, Sprigg said.

"While there is a religious exemption of sorts in this bill, we are not convinced that any exemption could be written in such a way that protects the rights of those who disapprove of homosexual conduct," he said.

But the bill's authors say they provide a broad exemption for religious organizations.

Any religious entity that is currently exempt from the employment-discrimination provisions in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 would also be exempt under the proposed law, the bill's supporters say.

"Americans understand that it's time to make sure our LGBT friends and family are treated fairly and have the same opportunities," said Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore.,who is the bill's lead sponsor. "Now it's time for our laws to catch up. People should be judged at work on their ability to do the job, period."

Rafter said supporters of the bill believe a victory in the Senate could lead to action in the House. "The House is a little tougher, but we do see momentum there," he said.

In just the last few days, Rafter said, Republican Reps. Jon Runyan of New Jersey and Chris Gibson of New York joined three other Republican co-sponsors of the House bill.

Sprigg said he has heard that House Democrats may try to force a vote on the bill using a procedural tool called a discharge petition. If they can get 218 signatures -- which would require support from 18 Republicans -- they can bring the legislation to the House floor for a vote.

"If it does come out of the Senate, that will put more pressure on the House," Sprigg said. "We can't be 100 percent sure what's going to happen there."

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Farm bill offers test for D.C.'s politics, according to Vilsack

WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON Stalled negotiations over a farm bill threaten more than trouble for farmers and consumers, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack says.

They're also a broader test of whether Washington can work.

The huge bill, which is more than a year overdue, is caught in a huge dispute between the House and Senate over how much to cut the food stamp program, among other issues.

Vilsack notes that failure to pass it before the end of the year could double milk prices for Americans, spark retaliatory tariffs from Brazil and leave livestock producers who have been hit by storms and drought without standard federal assistance.

Vilsack characterized the talks as a case study of an embattled government.

"This is a bill that should reignite what little DNA is left of bipartisanship in Washington, D.C.," he says.

"This has been a bill that's always been relatively easy for Congress to get done, and if we don't get it done, I think it sends another negative message to the country about the workings of government."

He sees passage starting momentum

On the other hand, passing the farm bill could be a tonic for what ails the capital, he argues, likening it to a stumbling football team that decides to change it's strategy and get back to basics.

"We (should) get back to blocking and tackling -- pass a bill, a major bill," he says. "When that happens, basically, relationships are formed, opportunities for success are created and I think it creates a momentum" that could boost prospects in Washington for a budget agreement and even immigration legislation.

He says "folks have been stuck" in House-Senate negotiations that missed a self-imposed deadline last week to agree on a framework so a bill could be passed before the end of the year.

He says Iowa would back Clinton in 2016

Vilsack, 62, a former two-term governor of Iowa, predicts Hillary Rodham Clinton would fare better in the Hawkeye State in 2016 than she did in 2008, when Barack Obama defeated her in the opening presidential caucuses.

"Let me just say that, from my perspective, Secretary Clinton didn't lose the Iowa caucus; the president won the Iowa caucus," says Vilsack, who supported Clinton. "His team did an enormous job of attracting new people to the system."

If Clinton decides to run again, "I'm reasonably confident that she'll receive a very good reception in Iowa," he says.

He is less certain that New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie would be at all welcome in the state's Republican caucuses, which were won in 2012 by Rick Santorum.

If Christie runs, he'll need to take a page from Obama's book, Vilsack says.

"He's going to have to look at ways in which he can expand the base of caucusgoers, because it is a very conservative Republican Party right now."

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

He saw Ariz. schools undivided by racial prejudice of the time

e was an enlightened man in Arizona's dark ages.

Because Arizonans have faced tough obstacles for a long time, it's worth remembering our history of conquering problems. One man faced issues years ago and stood up for his beliefs.

Joseph H. Kibbey came to the Salt River Valley from Indiana, when Phoenix was still a remote settlement of dirt roads and deep ruts and the powerful musk of livestock reminded everyone this was very much a cow town.

The young lawyer had come to Territorial Arizona, specifically to Florence, to be a legal adviser to an irrigation firm, historian Jay J. Wagoner recounts. But very soon after, he would climb his career ladder to Arizona's highest rung.

If there was work of great import, Kibbey was the man to do it. He served as city attorney of Phoenix, territorial attorney general, territorial governor and county and state chairman of the Republican Party.

He is best known for so skillfully crafting Articles of Incorporation for the Salt River Valley Water Users' Association that they became a model of organization for many of America's later reclamation projects, according to the Salt River Project's history "The Taming of the Salt."

But his most extraordinary act was one of defiance: a defense of the public-school system and the few Black children it served.

The Arizona Territory in 1909 was very much a creature of its time, both reflexively and institutionally intolerant.

The Territorial Legislature passed a measure that year giving school districts the option to segregate their Black students from students of other races. The popular will was being expressed, and Kibbey, then territorial governor, would have none of it.

It is one thing to stand against racism in an enlightened age when there is broad agreement that such laws are despicable. It is radicalism to do it when virtually all of polite society, all of government, all of your friends and neighbors stand against you.

To his eternal credit, none of that deterred Gov. Kibbey. He leaned into those headwinds and eagerly vetoed the bill, historian Brad Luckingham writes.

"It would be unfair that pupils of the African race should be given accommodations and facilities for a common school education, less effective, less complete, less convenient or less pleasant … than those accorded pupils of the White race," Kibbey wrote.

Unmoved, the Territorial Legislature promptly overrode Kibbey's veto.

A year later, the Phoenix School Board began to segregate its schools.

Kibbey by then was no longer governor and back in private practice. Phoenix Blacks hired him to seek an injunction against the school board. A lawsuit was filed on behalf of Black leader Samuel F. Bayless to address the hardship created:

"Bayless had two daughters, six and 10 years old, who prior to segregation had walked five blocks to school. After Douglass School (for Blacks) opened, the girls were forced to walk two miles and to cross the tracks of both the Southern Pacific and the SFP&P, an act that imperiled life and limb," Luckingham writes.

The courts ultimately ruled against Kibbey and his Black clients. It would take another generation to right this wrong. Another generation before history's gavel would fall.

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Are pleas by Obama hindering the push?

As President Barack Obama re-engages on immigration reform, some of his allies disagree about how big of a role he should take in the debate on Capitol Hill.

ONLINE

Follow the immigration-reform debate in Congress at immigration.azcentral.com.

In Thursday remarks at the White House, Obama reiterated his position that "common sense" immigration reform is a politically popular way to "grow the economy and shrink our deficits" while securing the U.S. border, modernizing the visa system and offering a pathway to citizenship for most of the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants who have already settled in the United States.

Urging Congress to act this year, Obama also made it clear that he prefers the bipartisan approach of the Democratic- controlled Senate, which on June 27 passed a comprehensive package that has been languishing in the GOP-controlled House of Representatives. House Democrats have offered similar legislation, but Obama added that "if House Republicans have new and different, additional ideas for how we should move forward, then we want to hear them."

The House has been working on its own series of smaller immigration-related bills but has yet to pass any. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, has signaled that action on immigration is still possible, and several GOP lawmakers have indicated that they are exploring possible approaches to addressing the legal status of the undocumented population.

Obama's remarks earned applause in the immigrant community, but some observers said they want the president to move beyond prodding Congress and use his executive authority to halt deportations.

Other reform supporters, particularly in the business world, worry that his high-profile stand risks further alienating conservative House Republicans, many of whom are still nursing bruised egos from the recent government shutdown and debt-ceiling fight.

Immigration-reform advocates have considered 2013 their best opportunity to pass a comprehensive bill since the last serious effort failed in 2007, but time is running out.

The push is on to finish immigration reform in the next few months because by early 2014, Congress will be overshadowed by midterm-election politics. Those partisan atmospherics make bipartisan cooperation less likely, although some analysts and reform supporters are hopeful there may be another window of opportunity once primary-election ballots are set and Republican incumbents don't need to worry about challenges from conservatives who oppose "amnesty" for undocumented immigrants.

"It doesn't make sense to have 11 million people who are in this country illegally without any incentive or any way for them to come out of the shadows, get right with the law, meet their responsibilities and permit their families then to move ahead," Obama said during his speech at the White House, where he was joined by Vice President Joe Biden and reform supporters.

"It's not smart," Obama said. "It's not fair. It doesn't make sense. We have kicked this particular can down the road for too long."

Growing support

For most of this year, Obama has kept his distance from the legislative action, giving the Senate's bipartisan "Gang of Eight" of four Democrats and four Republicans the time they needed to craft their bill. The group included Republican Sens. John McCain and Jeff Flake of Arizona.

Because of the delicate political dynamics of the House, Obama's increasing presence in the immigration debate gives anxiety to some pro-reform business leaders who traditionally have a good rapport with Republicans. The fear is that some GOP partisans who might otherwise support reform could balk if they feel Obama is muscling them.

"It hurts more than it helps," said Glenn Hamer, president and CEO of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, who, with other business leaders, will travel to Washington next week to lobby lawmakers to pass immigration reform. "We understand and we appreciate that this is a big issue for him. It's a big issue for the country. This would be a good time for the House of Representatives to really pass out its vision for immigration reform."

In his Thursday statement, Obama acknowledged that his support could provoke new antagonism from his conservative critics, but he emphasized that immigration reform -- the top domestic priority of Obama's second term -- has broad-based political appeal and historically has attracted support from Republicans, including former President George W. Bush.

"I know that there are some folks in this town who are primed to think, 'Well, if Obama is for it, then I'm against it,'" Obama said. "But I'd remind everybody that my Republican predecessor was also for it when he proposed reforms like this almost a decade ago, and I joined with 23 Senate Republicans back then to support that reform. I'd remind you that this reform won more than a dozen Republican votes in the Senate in June."

He added: "I'm not running for office again. I just believe this is the right thing to do."

One leading national champion of immigration reform dismissed the idea that Obama should defer to House Republicans who dislike him.

Frank Sharry, executive director of the pro- reform organization America's Voice and an expert in immigration politics, said the restraint that Obama has shown thus far is testament to how badly the president wants a bill passed.

For example, Obama has refrained from trying to punish Republicans politically for holding it up, he said.

"Come on, he's the president. He gets to use the bully pulpit to try to set the agenda," Sharry said. "Obviously, it's only going to happen if the House Republicans decide to do it. Everybody in the world knows that everybody wants to get it done except for the divided House GOP. They have to decide whether they want to be the party of responsible governance or the party of confrontational nihilism. So, it's their call."

Another immigrant advocate called on Obama to show more leadership by curtailing his administration's "outrageous number of deportations," which affect many people who could benefit from reform, although such a step also could rile House Republicans.

Some GOP lawmakers already have suggested they don't trust the Obama administration to properly enforce any new immigration or border- security laws that might be passed.

"From our perspective, the president is definitely a big stakeholder and player in getting immigration reform done," said Cristina Jimenez, managing director of the immigrant-youth network United We Dream.

"We don't believe that for the president to step up and push Congress to get this done undermines the efforts," she said. "But we also believe that the president himself could do more."

Limited influence

Other observers, including Arizona's two members of the Senate Gang of Eight, suggested that Obama's powers of persuasion probably are limited with regard to many House Republicans.

"I don't know if it helps or hurts, to be honest with you," McCain said Tuesday when asked about a more active Obama role. "I think that the Republican Party understands the majority of Americans want this issue resolved. There are many members of Congress that represent districts where the majority do not support immigration reform, and we understand and respect that."

John J. "Jack" Pitney Jr., a political scientist at Claremont McKenna College in Southern California, also said rank-and-file House Republicans are more likely to take their cues on immigration reform from their conservative base than from Obama or even the national GOP leaders who want to improve the party's image with Latino voters.

"For the average House Republican, the Number 1 concern is his or her own district, and most Republicans are not getting much clamor for the liberalization of immigration laws in their own districts," Pitney said. "You can argue that it's in the party's long-term interest to address the issue, but 'long-term interest' doesn't get a vote in primaries and general elections."

Flake, who served 12 years in the House before moving to the Senate, said time appears to be immigration reform's biggest enemy. "The president saying it isn't going to make it happen," Flake said. "Let's face it: The calendar is going to be tough this year."

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Christie's race covers political present, future

WAYNE, N.J. — WAYNE, N.J. With the governor election less than a month away, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is telling voters that he might not serve out his full second term if elected.

The admission might hurt any other candidate.

But for Christie, it underscores his popularity as a straight-talking Republican in a Democratic state. And it highlights what's at stake in New Jersey's looming governor election -- a contest as much about Christie's presidential aspirations as the governor's race.

He did not laugh off a question about his political future when asked during his first re-election debate Tuesday.

"I am not going to declare tonight … that I am or I'm not running for president," Christie said.

He later quipped: "I can walk and chew gum at the same time. I can do this job and also deal with my future. And that's what I will do."

That's exactly what Christie is doing as he uses his governor election to make the case for a higher office.

Buoyed by polls suggesting he has a commanding lead in his re-election bid, Christie's team is assembling a broad coalition of supporters -- groups of Democrats, union workers, women and minorities that Republican candidates elsewhere struggle to attract. He says his re-election campaign offers a road map of sorts for beleaguered Republicans across the nation as the party works to expand.

"We've got to win elections again. And that's what we're going to show the whole country in New Jersey on Nov. 5," Christie said of his party.

"I thought that the Republican Party was put into effect to win elections. I didn't think we were some debating society or some group of academic elites that sit around and talk about big ideas but don't do anything about them," he continued.

Christie's philosophy aligns him with Republican pragmatists pushing the GOP to embrace political moderation. Despite detailed recommendations by the Republican National Committee to do just that, the pragmatists are losing the debate as the GOP's more conservative wing drives the national discussion in Washington.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

SCHIEFFER

(PNI) They said it

"Presidents change and directors change -- you can keep changing the showbiz side, the names on the marquee -- but the ways, needs, demands, imperatives, secrets and strategies of The Agencies stay pretty much the same, except for one thing: They always want more."

Peggy Noonan,

Wall Street Journal

"But wait, the president can explain. It's not what we think. People won't have the same insurance -- they will have better insurance, administration officials assure. That's not the way some of the people receiving these letters see it. The president's original promise was so ironclad and repeated so often that any explanation now sounds like dissembling."

John Dickerson,

Slate

Top tweets

Bob Schieffer

@bobschieffer

Many people have received Cronkite Award for Excellence in Journalism, not sure anyone appreciates it more than I do. Thanks @Cronkite _ASU!

Constantin Querard

@CQuerard

So much media coverage of how @JohnMcCain could face a "tea party challenger" if he runs again. It will be a Republican Party challenger.

Joe Arpaio

@RealSheriffJoe

If I were ever going to don a Halloween costume, it would be…The Lone Ranger.

Barrett Marson

@barrettmarson

If Landrum Taylor doesn't run for SOS, who will? Dems don't have a bench. Heck, they don't even have a footstool.

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

GOP to keep focus on health-care law for 2014 races

WASHINGTON — one handed to them by the administration itself.

While Congress was arguing, Obama's plan to expand coverage for the uninsured suffered a self-inflicted wound. A computer system with design flaws gummed up the first open enrollment season. After nearly three weeks, it's still not fixed.

Republicans hope to ride that and other defects they see in the law into the 2014 congressional elections.

Four Democratic senators are facing re-election for the first time since they voted for the Affordable Care Act, and their defeat is critical to GOP aspirations for a Senate majority. Democrats say that's just more wishful thinking, if not obsession.

Although Obama's law remains divisive, only 29percent of the public favors its complete repeal, according to a recent Gallup poll.

The business-oriented wing of the Republican Party wants to move on to other issues. And Americans may be weary from the health-care fight.

'Stop the arguing'

"This is the law of the land at this point," said Michael Weaver, a self-employed photographer from rural southern Illinois who's been uninsured for about a year. "We need to stop the arguing and move forward to make it work."

It took him about a week and half, but Weaver kept going back to the healthcare.gov website until he was able to open an account and apply for a tax credit that will reduce his premiums. He's not completely finished because he hasn't selected an insurance plan, but he's been able to browse options.

It beats providing page after page of personal health information to insurance companies, Weaver said.

Under the new law, insurers have to accept people with health problems. Weaver is in his mid-50s, with high blood pressure and high cholesterol, but otherwise in good health. He says those common conditions made it hard for him to get coverage before.

Although Weaver seems to have gotten past the major website obstacles, he's still finding shortcomings.

There's no place to type in his medications and find out what plans cover them. "I wish there was more detail, so you could really figure it out," he said.

Congressional Republicans are favoring a less nuanced critique.

Criticism continues

"TrainWreck: Skyrocketing Prices, Blank Screens, & Error Messages," screamed the headline on a press release Friday from House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio. A House hearing on the ACA rollout is scheduled for this week. GOP lawmakers want Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to resign.

Administration officials, in their most detailed accounting yet of the early rollout, said Saturday that about 476,000 health-insurance applications have been filed through federal and state exchanges. But the officials continue to refuse to say how many people have enrolled in the insurance markets.

Without enrollment figures, it's unclear whether the program is on track to reach the 7million people projected by the Congressional Budget Office to gain coverage during the six-month sign-up period.

The president was expected to address the problems today during a health-care event at the White House. The administration has yet to fully explain what has gone wrong with the online sign-up system.

Democratic pollster Celinda Lake says she doesn't see how going after the health-law rollout will help Republicans by the time of next year's election.

Fixing the website

"Americans are technology optimists," Lake said.

"You tell them the website has problems today, and they'll assume it will be better tomorrow. I mean, we're Americans. We can fix a website."

Republicans are intent on making the health law an uncomfortable anchor around the neck of four Democratic senators seeking re-election in GOP-leaning states, weighing them down as they try to unseat them. Republicans need to gain six seats to seize the majority in the Senate, and any formula for control includes flipping the four seats.

Sens. Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Mark Begich of Alaska and Kay Hagan of North Carolina will face voters for the first time since they were among the 60 Democrats who voted for the health law in 2009.

More than a year before the election, Republican Rep. Tom Cotton is airing an ad that criticizes Pryor for his vote, telling Arkansans that Pryor "cast the deciding vote to make you live under Obamacare." The commercial's final image shows Pryor with Obama, who took a drubbing in Arkansas last year.

"The bottom line is these candidates will have to answer for why they voted for this bill," said Rob Engstrom, senior vice president and national political director for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

If the website gets fixed, other problems may emerge. Republicans can still try linking 'Obamacare' to rising premiums, anemic job growth and broader economic worries.

Will criticism work?

The chamber spent millions on ads in 2012 criticizing Senate incumbents such as Jon Tester of Montana and Bill Nelson of Florida for their health-care votes, yet many of those candidates overcame the criticism and won re-election.

The economy, not health care, remains the top concern of voters. By putting opposition to the health-care law ahead of all other priorities, economist Douglas Holtz-Eakin says "tea party" conservatives may have overdone it.

"Obamacare was an effective campaign weapon," said Holtz-Eakin, an adviser to Republicans. "The question is, have they damaged it beyond its political viability?"

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

New rallying cry: Throw the bums out

(PNI) I am embarrassed to be an American today. Our representatives in Washington have made fools of us, as well as themselves -- some promoting stupidity, the rest not stopping them.

We need a new national mission and a new motto -- and a new rallying cry to symbolize it. I nominate "2TBO," standing for "Throw the bums out."

I suggest that we create and display bumper stickers, front-yard signs, pennants to hang on radio antennas, printed T-shirts, placards to wave about at rallies and parades and sports events. We must have a public conversation proclaiming this new concept and accept a personal commitment to use our votes to oust all presently serving federal-level elected officials in 2014, 2016 and beyond, if necessary.

Let us restore our national sanity and our pride. Americans deserves better than we are getting, and I insist that my country can and shall be worthy of itself once again.

--J. Hill, Surprise

McCain's remarks

Much can be said, both pro and con, about Sen. John McCain's political positions taken during the partial government shutdown and debt-ceiling debates.

But speaking as a long-term, loyal Republican, his highly publicized attacks on his fellow Republican senators are inexcusable, pure bush league -- like the rants of a radical, left-wing Democrat.

--John Forster,

Phoenix

Lawmakers must go

It was with great disappointment I note that the four Arizona Republican members of the U.S. House of Representatives -- Trent Franks, Paul Gosar, Matt Salmon and David Schweikert -- voted against raising the debt ceiling and opening the federal government. How irresponsible, as per our Constitution, the public debt of the United States shall not be questioned.

What happens if I as a citizen don't pay my loans? Repossession results. So it is time that these four be repossessed during the next election as Arizona must do better and have better representation in Congress.

--Rollin L. Stark,

Scottsdale

Traitorous politicians

I have two words for the traitorous politicians attempting to bring our great nation to its knees: "tar" and "feathers"!

--Jim White, Glendale

Government's job?

While reading the editorial Tuesday, "If Congress acts, don't clap," I noted the last paragraph, which I think may have been an error.

It stated, "The only heroes in this tragedy are the Americans who still believe their government can -- eventually -- do the right thing."

It should have stated, "The only heroes are the Americans who still believe their government can -- eventually --do everything!" That is, food stamps, free cellphones, free health care (a lie), subsidized housing, free lunches for grade school kids, and the list goes on.

--Barbara Woltz,

Surprise

GOP's next wave

The path to Republican Party dominance is finally clear.

For the near future, they have lost the Black, Hispanic and independent voters. "Tea party" and far-right-wing voters will still control the primary selections, and true conservatives will vote for Democratic candidates while holding their nose.

Democrats gain control of all branches of the government. The tea party and Religious Right lose their traction.

The next wave of Republican Party candidates are thoughtful moderates that focus on restoring the middle class, developing a workable immigration policy, an improved health-care program and promote gay and women's rights.

Voters respect the change in the party and the pendulum swings again.

--Earl Barrett,

Phoenix

Under 'Cruz control'

Americans, it's time to get back in the driver's seat and take control of this out-of-control Congress, which is unable to make compromises and just keeps kicking the can down the road.

The national debt is continuing to rise and the nation's economy to deteriorate. It's time to put this vehicle under "Cruz control," Texas style.

We need to support Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who will attempt to reduce spending and move this country towards a balanced budget.

--Dess Chappelear,

Sun City West

Kids' consequences

Concerning the Arizona State University drunk-and-disorderly students:

The fault lies completely at the hands of the students who are choosing to drink, get drunk and drive. The problem is that they do not care about any consequences, short-term or long-term.

That brings the question: "What will it take for them to care?"

More immediate consequences are needed. Longer jail time and larger fines for drinking offenses. Nothing else seems to be working. Alcohol education seems to have only added to their drinking.

Sadly, how many will never see the end of college because of a final consequence? We shall see.

--Trae West, Phoenix

Enforcement broken

During the immigration debate, we frequently hear the statement: "We need to fix our immigration policy; it is broken."

For me, the only thing broken is the lack of enforcement. The federal government has been absent for political purposes.

There is nothing wrong with immigrants coming to America; what is wrong is when it is done illegally. No one has the right to demand legal status when that person broke immigration laws to get here. Sometimes, the answer is too simple for the politicians to figure out. It is time to clean house.

--Michael Grassia,

Mesa

Negotiations needed

Negotiations on sequester but not on "Obamacare"? Both are the "law of the land."

--Phil Pizzi, Mesa

Kids figured it out

My daughter was talking back to the news on the radio as she was driving her children home from school. She was expressing frustration at the political standoff in Washington with the debt ceiling, government shutdown and the general mess we are in.

Her 9-year-old son asked her what was going on. She must have done a pretty good job of explaining it because he said, with very firm disgust, "Mom, that's a dity."

When she asked him what a "dity" is, he replied: "It's dumb and a pity with a hint of ridiculousness."

The kids have it figured out; why can't our great leaders?

--Aggie Angerer,

Phoenix

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

House Republicans, Obama seek end to budget stalemate

WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON Negotiations to end the government shutdown and avert default continued Friday as Senate Republicans huddled with President Barack Obama privately to discuss a pathway out of the impasse.

POLL: MOST FAULT REPUBLICANS FOR SHUTDOWN

A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll showed more people blaming Republicans than President Barack Obama for the shutdown, 53percent to 31percent. Just 24percent viewed the Republican Party positively, compared with 39 percent with positive views of the Democratic Party.

"The question is: Can you get something in the next 72 hours? The president seems committed to being engaged in it, and he hadn't been up to this point, so I'm optimistic," said Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., after the meeting.

House and Senate Republicans appear to be pursuing different negotiations with the White House, and it is unclear whether either proposal can win over Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who is leading congressional Democrats in the negotiations.

Democrats have resisted GOP efforts, led by House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, to engage in budget talks until the government is reopened and the debt ceiling is increased before the Oct.17 deadline.

Day 11

The shutdown, in its 11th day Friday, began when Republicans demanded a delay or defunding of the Affordable Care Act in exchange for their votes to keep the government running.

The funding discussion has now snowballed to include a plan to increase the U.S. borrowing limit so the nation can continue to pay its bills on time. Republicans have since moved on from focusing solely on the health care law to seeking broader concessions on fiscal issues.

Congress will continue to work through the weekend. House Republicans will huddle Saturday morning and the Senate is scheduled to vote on a key procedural hurdle to move ahead with a 15-month increase in the debt ceiling with no conditions attached.

House Republicans have offered a short-term path to resolve the shutdown and avert default in order to reach a broader budget deal, while Senate Republicans appear to be mulling longer-term solutions in order to reach an agreement.

Stopgap measure

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, is working with senators in both parties on a budget framework that includes a six-month stopgap funding bill and suspends the debt ceiling through January. The extensions would give Congress breathing room to reach a broader budget agreement.

"I believe that still gives us plenty of leverage to work out a long-term fiscal plan, but it removes the threat of an immediate default," Collins said Friday.

Multiple Senate Republicans said the conversation with the president did not include the competing House proposal that would increase the debt ceiling for six weeks.

Republicans have also proposed a short-term stopgap spending bill to reopen the government after Obama rejected their proposal for only a debt ceiling increase.

Senate Republicans seem eager to resolve the impasse. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., cited a "devastating" NBC/WSJ polled released Thursday that showed the Republican Party's favorability at an all-time low. "I know that they're reading the polls," McCain said of House Republicans.

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

For Republican Party to survive, it will have to ostracize 'tea party' wing

(PNI) A major consideration that has become increasingly obvious in this total fiasco being waged in Washington, D.C., over the debt ceiling and government closure is that of party principle, platform and agenda.

What has been brought to the political forefront is the disharmony and political differences being displayed by a group of men and women grabbing the shirttails of the GOP and hijacking the entire Republican Party.

There are superficial similarities shared by the Republican Party base and "tea party" members. However, there are deep differences in core values and, most importantly, a national agenda regarding the future of our country.

If the GOP is to survive as a major political party in this country, it is going to have to rise up to defend its principles, platform and national agenda and dismiss these members from its caucus to stand alone in their political beliefs as the tea party.

--Robert Lake, Buckeye

'Tea party' unfairly demonized

The demonization of the "tea party" by the president, the Democrats and the media has achieved its purpose. A great many Americans are buying the caricature that the tea party is a negative force.

I would suggest viewing tapes of some of the larger demonstrations that would show respectful, largely older, multiracial Americans who want only less government, thriving capitalism and the return of freedoms we have had for much of our existence.

Amazing how the virtual world has trumped reality!

--Gary Yohe, Phoenix

Ariz. GOP's delegates a problem

All of you on The Republic editorial staff deserve our appreciation for your handling of the manufactured crisis in Washington. But you continue to ignore one local fact: The entire Republican wing of Arizona's congressional delegation has been part of this insanity.

When news reports described the 40 to 50 Republican extremists who have created the crisis, they are talking about our Republican members of Congress.

More complete local reporting and comment need to include that fact, don't you think?

--Bob Grossfeld, Mesa

Calling them leaders flat wrong

Regarding "Leaders closing in on a deal"(Republic, Tuesday):

Really?

You're calling those idiots in Washington, D.C., "leaders"?

--Corinne Crebassa, Phoenix

Medicare act, health law differ

Regarding "'Obamacare' hatred hypocritical" (Opinions, Tuesday):

The letter writer compares the Medicare Prescription Drug Act with Obamacare. While I agree "any" unfunded bill shouldn't pass Congress, I'd like to point out some major differences.

First, the prescription Medicare bill was passed with bipartisan support.

Second, it was not 2,000 pages that nobody read.

Third, you are not forced to use it.

Fourth, you're not penalized for not using it.

Fifth, even though it is expensive, it does not appear to be anywhere near the long-term cost of Obamacare.

--Mike Fisher, Peoria

Lake Powell is a beautiful place

Regarding The Republic's series this week on Lake Powell and Glen Canyon Dam:

I'm always amazed with the logic of people who want to drain Lake Powell. Don't they consider the millions of people who have and will enjoy one of the most beautiful places on Earth?

Up until Glen Canyon Dam was built, only a handful of people had seen Rainbow Bridge and other marvelous scenery of Glen Canyon.

My family and I have been enjoying Lake Powell for the past 40 years. We are grateful to the people who made Glen Canyon Dam and Lake Powell possible.

--Bob Wright, Mesa

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Shutdown straining ties between businesses, GOP

The ongoing federal government shutdown is straining the oft cozy relationship between the business community and the Republican Party.

And the growing possibility that the country could soon default on its debt is only adding to the tension.

Arizona's GOP congressmen -- U.S. Reps. Matt Salmon, David Schweikert, Trent Franks and Paul Gosar -- tout their pro-business credentials. But they are part of a conservative group of Republicans in the House of Representatives that is continuing to play hardball on a budget deal, much to the business community's chagrin.

Republicans see the federal government's current crisis as one of their few opportunities to win concessions on issues key to their base from Democrats who control the U.S. Senate and the White House. They include cutting government spending, reforming taxes or entitlements and, until recently, as they've moved to new tactics, gutting the health-care law.

Business leaders around the country and in Arizona say that they support those goals but that they fear the economic consequences of the stalemate, now in its 12th day.

"The country is still pulling out of its toughest economic downturn since the Great Depression. Why take any chances that federal government actions could reverse some of the positive economic progress we've made over the last three years?" said Glenn Hamer, president of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

Instead, Hamer thinks Republicans should agree to a "clean" continuing resolution that would end the shutdown and put federal employees back to work with no strings attached. And President Barack Obama, he said, should commit himself to cutting the nation's debt in exchange for a debt-ceiling increase.

The stalemate in Washington has continued, though talks between the two parties took on new urgency Friday with the possibility of a federal default just five days away. House Republicans were offering to pass short-term legislation that would avert the default and reopen the government as part of a framework that would include cuts in benefit programs.

But White House spokesman Jay Carney said late Friday that the president would not accept a stopgap deal that would put the nation back on the brink in six weeks.

Arizona impact

In the two weeks that the federal government has ceased doing business, some industries, including Arizona's vital tourism economy, are being hit hard.

National-parks advocates estimate close to $1 billion in visitor spending nationwide has been lost in the 12 days since parks closed. Arizona has lost 132,000 visitors and $13 million in tourism dollars at Grand Canyon National Park. Nearly 7,000 jobs are affected, from furloughed park staffers to tour guides with no visitors to show around, according to a report from the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees.

The defense industry, which is also critical to Arizona's economic health, has suffered, with government contracts put on hold. Lockheed Martin, for instance, has furloughed hundreds of workers.

"We are bearing a disproportionate brunt of the effects of the partial shutdown," Hamer said.

As a result, many of the same business groups to which Arizona Republicans have close ties are publicly pressuring the House GOP to put an end to the political brinkmanship. For example:

The head of the American Bankers Association said defaulting on the country's $17 trillion debt could cost hundreds of billions and ordinary Americans would suffer. "Using the debt ceiling as leverage in the deficit debate is unwise and dangerous," the association president said. The bankers association is a top donor to Schweikert.

The National Federation of Independent Business sent a letter to lawmakers, calling on them to avoid default. Gosar touted the federation's campaign endorsement last year.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce called reopening the government and raising the debt ceiling "must-pass legislation." During Salmon's bid to return to Congress in 2012, he pointed to awards from the chamber as proof he was pro-business.

Honeywell's chief executive was more blunt than most business leaders, who continue to call on both sides to compromise. "It's clearly this faction within the Republican Party that's causing the issue right now," CEO David Cote told theNew York Times. Honeywell is Franks' top donor, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Despite the business groups' views, Schweikert and Gosar believe fears of a default-related catastrophe are overblown. Franks did not respond to several requests for an interview, but he also has said Democrats are exaggerating debt-limit consequences.

Salmon believes Republicans must use the debt ceiling as leverage because he doesn't trust Democrats to compromise on things like reforming Social Security and Medicare.

Election impacts?

Recent polls indicate Republicans' popularity during the shutdown has tanked, causing political experts to speculate about a backlash against conservative members in the next election. A survey by Gallup indicated the GOP's favorability is at its lowest point since 1992, and an NBC News/WallStreet Journal poll said "tea party" favorability is at an all-time low of 21 percent.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., called the results "devastating."

In some parts of the country, tea-party Republicans are now facing more moderate campaign challengers propped up by the local business establishment.

But so far, Arizona's Republican House members appear safe in next year's midterm elections. Each represents a solidly GOP district and, despite the heartburn they're giving business leaders, none faces a campaign opponent.

Gosar said feedback from his constituents in rural northern Arizona is increasingly supportive of Republicans holding the line.

"They are ticked off at this president and this administration and the U.S. Senate," the Prescott Republican said. "At first, they were about 60-40 telling us to hang tough. Now, it's up to about 90-10."

Salmon said he's listening to his constituents, who on two telephone town halls backed him overwhelmingly.

"We are supposed to represent the feelings and thoughts of our constituents," he said.

Who speaks for business?

Arizona Republicans are proud their views aren't in line with "big business" groups like the U.S. Chamber.

Schweikert said the chamber benefits from federal spending programs that conservatives oppose, like the bank bailouts during the recession, which conservatives believe helped big businesses at the expense of the overall economy.

"This is the post-stimulus and post-bailout world," Schweikert said.

Salmon said he appreciates the chamber's input on raising the debt ceiling but thinks business groups should focus on the long-term goal that conservatives are pushing for: a long-term cut in government spending to reduce the country's overall debt.

"We're hearing from Big Business America saying, 'Do this now.' I'd like to hear them put the same pressure on (Senate Majority Leader) Harry Reid and the Democrats," he said.

Gosar said he would not support any bill that raises the debt ceiling without also delaying the health-care law for a year or doing something else to significantly reduce government spending and regulation.

He said conservatives are trying to help the economy.

"Anytime you're holding and restraining government, as we're trying to do, you're enabling investment in the private sector," he said.

Eric Herzik, chairman of the political-science department at the University of Nevada-Reno, said the debate is part of a split in the Republican Party.

"In the past, the Republicans were the party of business, the Chamber of Commerce, the banks, even Main Street businesses," Herzik said.

"(But) during the Bush administration, you got this division between Big Business/Wall Street and the little guy," he said, as stimulus programs that continued under the Obama administration fueled frustration among tea-party Republicans.

"They look at what happened and say, 'The little guy didn't get treated as well as the big guy,'" Herzig said.

He said groups like the Chamber of Commerce are caught in the middle, because they represent businesses of all sizes. "The chamber used to be kind of the touchstone for Republicans. Now, the tea-party Republicans are saying, 'No, you don't speak for business. We do,'" Herzig said. "And the chamber is saying, 'Who are you?'"

Patrick Kenney, a political-science professor and director of the Institute for Social Science Research at Arizona State University, said most hard-line Republicans are in such safe districts that they are unlikely to lose their seats over the shutdown or debt-ceiling crisis.

In Arizona, for instance, he noted that Gosar is in a more Republican district than he was in in 2011, when he voted to raise the debt ceiling. He took heat for it last election and has since hardened his stance.

But Kenney said it may be risky for Republicans to dismiss the importance of the debt ceiling.

"Virtually all economists agree that this would injure our reputation around the world with the people who buy our bonds," he said. "Even if you can get by for a little while with some manipulation of the money, it's obviously not sustainable."

He said McCain and Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., who both opposed the Affordable Care Act, are taking more of a pragmatic approach than their ideological GOP colleagues in the House.

"I don't think they see the House Republicans' strategy as a winning strategy," Kenney said.

Flake has said it makes sense to use the debt-ceiling debate to force spending cuts, as Republicans did two years ago with the Budget Control Act.

But doubting the consequences of a default, as Schweikert and Gosar have, makes him "cringe."

McCain blamed his own party for the impasse in an interview with Fox News Friday, calling the motivation behind the shutdown a "fool's errand."

"The whole premise of shutting down the government was the repeal of 'Obamacare,'" McCain said. "That gave the opportunity for this to be terribly, awfully mismanaged and mishandled by the White House."

On the debt limit, McCain said Republicans could negotiate with the president on entitlements and tax reform.

"There are things that are achievable. Defunding Obamacare is not one of them," he said.

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Medieval cadre of GOP in for hard political lesson

Fans of representative democracy know that there are ways to advocate one's beliefs short of threatening and delivering harm to the larger society.

It used to be that one could blame the parade of manufactured crises not on the whole Republican Party but on its unruly "tea party" faction. That's becoming less and less so as what remains of the pragmatic leadership caves in to the extremists' demands.

The GOP's perspective on governing seems to have moved from enlightenment to medieval. It's become the party of pain.

Before I go on, let me salute some individual Republicans for standing up to the insanity within their party: Rep. Peter King of New York, Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, Rep. Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania. You represent the Republican Party of my father.

For all their patriotic posturing, the tea-party bomb throwers don't like America very much. Worse, they don't understand how democratic governments or economies work. Some of their political leaders do know but don't care, using their electorate's confusion to enrich themselves off their bankroller billionaires.

There's nothing to do about these voters. They won't squawk until their own checks -- for Medicare, Social Security, farm subsidies, roadwork -- stop arriving. Tea-party congressional districts tend to be poor, old, rural and on the receiving end. If anyone is a burden to productive America, they are.

And so, President Barack Obama had to cancel a trip to Asia to baby-sit Republican tantrums in Washington. The financial and psychological damage of this shutdown keeps rising.

The Republican Party's staunchest allies -- the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers -- are now tearing out their hair, demanding a stop to all this ignoramus talk about a debt default being no big deal.

"Our nation has never defaulted in the past, and failing to raise the debt limit in a timely fashion will seriously disrupt our fragile economy and have a ripple effect through the world," wrote the president of NAM, nobody's idea of a liberal.

You have the formerly pragmatic Republican Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina speculating that a default on government debt is a manageable situation. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul has his nutty solution: spending piecemeal. If there's not enough tax money coming in during a particular month, he says, we can decide what it gets spent on.

Great, let's have fistfights every month over whether North Cascades National Park can answer its e-mail or not.

America's savers and investors, meanwhile, are given a choice of a kneecapping or punch in the stomach.

Looking forward to 2014, Republicans may have already lost their swing vote. And even districts packed with tea-party discontents may not be so safe as they assume.

Once it sinks in that their checks come from Washington and not from heaven, the hotheads will turn on a dime. And please stop calling them "conservatives."

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Shutdown was sharp lesson for Congress

WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON The one good thing to come out of the 16-day government shutdown is that members of Congress may be reluctant to do it again anytime soon, lawmakers and political analysts say.

Polls reflect anger; GOP takes the biggest hit

Polls conducted during the shutdown showed Americans were angry at lawmakers in both parties over the government shutdown, although Republicans received the biggest share of the blame.

A poll released Oct. 15 by the Pew Research Center showed a 43 percent approval rating for President Barack Obama, a 31 percent approval rating for Democratic congressional leaders and a 20 percent approval rating for Republican leaders. Asked whom they blamed for the shutdown, 46 percent said Republicans and 37 percent said the Obama administration.

The poll had a margin of error of about plus or minus 3percentage points.

The political brinksmanship cost the economy $24 billion, prompted criticism from world leaders and put some government offices and 800,000 federal employees out of work. Public support for the Republican Party dipped to historic lows, even as anger toward incumbents of both parties spiked.

Americans will soon see if Congress is taking a new path. The deal approved Wednesday to reopen the government funds federal agencies only through Jan. 15 and raises the nation's borrowing limit through Feb. 7. House and Senate negotiators will have to reach a new budget deal over the next few months to avert another shutdown and debt-ceiling crisis.

"The only thing this shutdown did was put our dysfunction on display," said Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., who was part of a bipartisan group that helped craft the deal to reopen the government. "People will think twice before they go down that road again."

The House Republicans and GOP senators who tried to use the government shutdown to derail the Affordable Care Act ended up with nothing to show for their efforts, said Jack Pitney, a political-science professor at Claremont McKenna College in California.

In the end, 87 House Republicans out of 232 voted against the deal, refusing to give in.

Their failure makes it less likely more-mainstream Republicans will support those tactics again, Pitney said. They are now more likely to stand up to their "tea party" colleagues and oppose a strategy that forces a shutdown, he said.

"I think a lot of members have gotten the message that this strategy doesn't work," Pitney said. "Now whether the most hard-core members have absorbed that knowledge remains to be seen. But I think most Republicans realize that the president is not going to fold, and that probably reduces the chances of a shutdown happening again. We'll see."

The shutdown was only the most recent clash over federal spending that has characterized Congress in recent years. Both chambers of Congress have not agreed on a budget resolution since 2009. While not binding, such resolutions provide a blueprint for the House and Senate appropriations committees to decide how to spend billions of dollars of taxpayer money.

The failure of Congress to pass a budget or individual spending bills for federal agencies has forced lawmakers to pass "continuing resolutions" to keep the government funded. The 16-day shutdown occurred when Congress failed to pass the latest continuing resolution.

The Arizona Republicans in the House who fought to delay or defund the president's signature health-care law acknowledged the episode didn't end well for them.

"At the end of the day, I don't think we got a lot," said Rep. David Schweikert, R-Ariz., who voted against the deal that reopened the government.

Still, Schweikert said he is optimistic the crisis sparked a renewed commitment by both sides in Congress to come together and pass a budget.

"I don't think that (another shutdown) happens," Schweikert said. "I think there is a new emphasis to get the budget and appropriations committees fired up to get us through the budget process."

Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., said he was frustrated many Republicans caved to Democrats by voting for the bipartisan deal to reopen the government and raise the debt ceiling.

"All we've done is taught a spoiled child they're going to get their way," he said.

Despite the outcome, it was worth the effort, Gosar said. He vowed that he and other Republicans will continue to try to block the 3-year-old health-care law for the remainder of Obama's presidency.

"I don't know how Republicans lost at all," he said. "We had a conversation with the American people on a program that is destined to fail."

Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., said Republicans came away with the small victory of keeping the automatic, across-the-board "sequestration" budget cuts in place for fiscal 2014 -- at least until Jan. 15, when the current deal expires.

But the threat that the Affordable Care Act poses to "the fiscal survival of the country" was too great to ignore, Franks said.

"We control one-half of one-third of the American government," he said,referring to the GOP-controlled House. "Until the people of this country find both the wisdom and the will to change that equation, people like me are going to struggle to arrest America's march toward socialized medicine."

While the tea-party faction of the Republican Party defends its tactics, most members of Congress argue the shutdown was too painful to repeat, said Patrick Kenney, a political-science professor and director of the Institute for Social Science Research at Arizona State University.

"There was just too much cost in terms of real people's lives," Kenney said. "There was cost to citizens, to businesses and to the political parties. Both parties lost standing in the eyes of the public, but Republicans lost more. I think they will work really hard to avoid another shutdown if they can."

Rep. Ed Pastor, D-Ariz., said he hopes most lawmakers learned that there are no winners in a shutdown. "Everybody lost," Pastor said.

Congress must find a way to get back to the regular process of holding budget-committee meetings and negotiations to decide how much government will spend and what its priorities will be, Kenney said. "There is no magic bullet here," he said. "There's no good alternative to old-fashioned committee work and negotiating between the two parties. Threatening another shutdown is not going to accomplish what months of hard work through the committee process can accomplish."

Negotiators from the House and Senate budget committees have already begun meeting as part of the deal that Congress reached to reopen the government. They have a deadline of mid-December to complete proposals for compromises on a budget plan and report back.

A spokeswoman for Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, D-Ariz., said there is a lot riding on those budget negotiations.

"A key factor will be how the negotiations in the conference committee play out," said spokeswoman Jennifer Johnson. "We'll know that by Dec. 15 and will have a better sense of whether compromise is happening. This cycle of flailing from crisis to crisis must be stopped."

Rep. Ron Barber, D-Ariz., said Congress "cannot allow another round of political brinksmanship."

"We must come together to adopt a bipartisan budget that ends sequestration (automatic budget cuts), creates jobs and protects Social Security and Medicare," he said. "Southern Arizonans have already suffered too much from the economic uncertainty caused by the shutdown, and I am committed to working with my colleagues to find common-sense and long-term solutions to get our fiscal house in order."

But Gosar is pessimistic.

"We're going to be doing this all over again," he predicted. "This agreement by the Senate brings us to another crisis point. We're going to be doing this all next year and through the rest of this president's presidency. This is going to be a rocky road for the American people and for businesses."

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here