Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
>>> Coming up next on "Arizona
Horizon," journalists
roundtable.
Fallout over the lack of death
benefits for many of those
killed fighting the Yarnell hill
fire.
The Justice Department files
suit to block the proposed
merger between US Airways and
American Airlines.
>>> those stories and more next
on the journalists' roundtable.
>> "Arizona Horizon" is made
possible by contributions from
the friends of 8, members of
your Arizona PBS station.
Thank you.
>>> Good evening.
Welcome to "Arizona Horizon"'s
journalists rounds table.
I'm Ted Simons.
Jim Small of the Arizona capitol
time, mine Sunnucks and Luige
Del Puerto of the capitol times.
Jim, we're talking not fighting
the fire, the Feds did have a
grant situation in there, but as
far as insuring people who
didn't have insurance,
replacing, rebuilding their
homes, the Fed said I don't
think so.
>> Feds said the severity of the
fire and the damage that it
caused, to the town of Yarnell
and surrounding areas, wasn't
enough to meet the criteria to
provide federal emergency aid.
State lawmakers and the governor
all expressed their
dissatisfaction with the ruling.
There's certainly a political
union at this time of some sort
involved in trying to get this
federal aid.
They are talking about appealing
T. house speaker Tobin and House
Minority Leader Campbell, who
oftentimes are at loggerheads
and don't necessarily see eye to
eye on issues, jointly put out a
joint statement saying the
federal government needs to
reconsider and that they sent a
letter to FEMA asking for --
>> FEMA saying state an local
governments, charities, the
region, the local folks can take
care of T. we're not needed.
>> that's their argument.
Obviously folks disagree.
Senator Mccain says he got a
lot of assurances.
The vice president came out for
the funeral for the
firefighters, making some
assurances.
I think the point they only
asked for a couple million
dollars, a drop in the bucket
for FEMA's budget.
The damage of the fire was minor
but the perception of the fire
is that it was severe because of
the horrible fatalities of the
firefighters.
They are trying to maybe
disconnect about the damages and
what FEMA could do and what
actually happened with the fire.
Of course the horrible things
that happened.
>> we'll talk about this in a
second.
FEMA is looking at spending far
less in the city of Prescott
would spend for death benefits
for some of the firefighters yet
the Feds are saying you can take
care of this.
Good luck.
>> I was looking at when was the
last time FEMA had actually
declared a major disaster for
Arizona.
It was in 2010 when we had the
flooding up in the north.
After that all the fires that we
have had have been declared
incident management which
basically says they would help.
They had helped in putting out
the fire, but they haven't since
declared a major disaster in our
state.
You're right, this is a small
money or small sum that we're
talking about, but in their
letter to the president of FEMA,
they basically said, look, it's
6,000 acres that were destroyed.
It's 200% of homes destroyed.
More than 200 homes were
destroyed by the fire.
More than two dozens or so that
have minor problems as well.
So even though it may seem small
for this small community it's a
huge thing.
Of course the fact that we have
19 firefighters dying of course
they say that just adds to the
gravity of this incident.
>> there's a lot of partisan and
regional and community overtones
and under-tones.
The Obama administration is
democratic.
McCain and the governor and
flake are all Republicans.
The issues the state has had
with the administration.
There's also the argument that
FEMA and the administration
maybe favor certain types of
communities, bigger cities than
the rural folks.
It's been a debate that's gone
on in Congress for a little bit
that they will throw tons of
money, Sandy, Hurricanes, things
back east, throw tons of money
at.
That how much are they spending
there, then you have smaller
things out west in rural areas
that they are thought as
aggressive on.
>> you mentioned partisanship.
Some critics of what the state
is doing are crying hypocracy.
You want the federal government
off your back, don't tread on
me, yet for $2 million you're
raising a big fit over this.
That's what some critics are
saying.
Lot of folks agree with them.
>> yes.
Certainly you know far be it
from anybody to abstain from
making a political point over a
tragedy.
That seems to be the way things
go nowadays.
But all politics is local.
That's what we see in Andy
Tobin's district.
He has a stake in it.
Partisanship issues between
Mccain and flake and Obama.
But you do have Democrats who
while they may have their own
political interests but who do
see a value in pushing for
trying to get the federal
government to do it.
Saying look the state should
step up and pay this money
itself.
We can find the money in our
budget.
We got a $10 million budget.
>> I think it's a question
today, right, one of the
firefighters who had died
essentially the widow, the
governor called for a special
session so state benefits could
be extended to all of the crew
members who had died.
I talked to, communicated with
Mr. Tobin this morning.
He says that may be a bit
premature.
We want a firmer grasp of what
would be the cost of this.
The legality of retract --
retroactively extending benefits
those who died.
Obviously there were many that
wanted to do it right away.
Rubin Gallegos says it's 2
million out of a $9 billion
budget.
It's a rounding error if you
think of it.
He's pushing and they are okay
with the special session to do
it.
>> Special session also has been
considered as you mentioned
regarding benefits for some of
the firefighters.
13 of the 19 firefighters who
were seasonal temporary no death
benefits talked to us about
this.
This is creating quite a divide
between some people who see the
visual but also understand that
these folks did sign up for
this.
>> Yes, the folks up in
Prescott, the government up
there, is really in a tough
spot.
This could cost them a lot of
money.
There's folks Northrup making
dire predictions about the
financial cost but the flip side
is the human tragedy and
sympathy and empathy for the
firefighters and their families.
I can't see the legislature not
doing something on this.
The local folks have a tougher
time.
The budget constraints.
>> what would the legislature
do?
Speaker Tobin was on the show.
He says he's drafting stuff as
we speak.
Are you talking about full
benefits?
>> What speaker Tobin is talking
about doing is saying any first
responder who dice fight ago
fire on state land, whether they
are full-time, part-time,
whatever their employment status
is they would get basically
benefits equivalent to a
full-time employee through the
state's public safety retirement
system.
Pay a cash payment.
Things like that.
They would qualify instantly for
that by the enact they are first
responders and heroes who
sacrificed all in defense of the
state.
The real question becomes when
do this tackle it?
Do they wait a month or wait
until January?
No matter when it's going to be
retroactive for to June 30.
The issue is when does the
legislature take it up?
The legislature will find a way,
just when does it actually
happen.
>> uncharted Waters.
Such an isolated case they are
dealing with.
I think they still need to
figure those things out.
I adopt think the local folks
have the wherewithal financially
to deal with that.
>> What you're saying is got to
be a firefighter, have to lose
your life fight ago fire on
state lands, you're nonemergency
responder, if you're a seasonal
temporary worker not necessarily
applying to you.
>> Well, right now we Don have
the language in the bill.
To make it so that those who
died, there will be first
responders, they died in a state
trust land they would get full
benefits extended to them by the
public retirement system.
That's essentially the idea.
The contours of this one we Don
know yet.
That's one of the reasons why we
talk to some of the legislators
this morning, what do you think?
Some said yeah on an emotional
level something has to be done.
To be clear, all of them say
something needs to be done.
It's just that when do we need
to do it?
Do but need to do it right away?
There's so the Thom and I'm
sensing hesitation from some
lawmakers.
There's some thought maybe the
families are receiving or have
received right now some lump
sums that that may be enough for
the moment to tied them over
until the next regular session.
When they can -- when for sure
they would tackle this issue.
>> I think the issue is there's
a concern they don't want to
rush into inning something out
of emotion.
When you do things like that,
that's a recipe for doing
something maybe inadvertent or
maybe writing it too broadly.
To your question about who it's
going to apply to, that's part
of the debate.
They are trying to get advice
from the pension system to see
who this would cover.
Who is going to be included?
Is it going to be including
groups it's not intended to?
Is it going to cost more than
expected?
I think those are part of the
discussion happening now behind
the scenes.
It's a matter of when they
settle on something and then
take it to the legislators, when
do they get that --
>> If it's a narrow bill just
for this group or if people
start throwing in police
officers, national guard, people
at the border, those types of
things.
It could ab can of worms -- a
can of worms, unintended
consequences policy wise and
money wise.
>> it would apply to in this
particular case the firefighters
who died.
That would be the key to
success.
Otherwise you open all sorts of
cans and people would push for
everything.
>> We had him on the show this
week.
We fine out that maybe he's
nosing around for congressional
district 1 --
>> He's nosed around for
congressional district 1 and
others a number of times.
He has political aspirations.
He's looking at running up there
in that district.
Ann Kirkpatrick is a Democrat.
A Republican would have a
chance.
This would be the time.
She won this new district.
This would be the time to take
her on.
I think he's taking a serious
look.
He's got some political chops.
>> Will he say speaker in.
>> He would stay speaker.
We spoke with one very close to
him.
Our source essentially said the
speak letter stay on as speaker.
You can wait another year.
It's not going to happen next
year.
He will stay on as speaker.
They probably see some benefits.
You do have that sort of minor
bully pickup pulpit, so there's
that.
He's fielding calls to see if he
has support.
There are a couple of things you
have to go through.
They have to make sure his
family is okay with T. he has a
business and a business partner.
They have to square that away.
There are other things.
Does he move physically to the
new district?
Does that mean he would move to
city one and reside there?
Those are questions that they
are going through now.
We expect something either by
the ends of this month or early
next month.
>> Challenge in that district
for Republicans.
Has the Navajo nation.
That put Kirkpatrick over the
top.
She's a moderate Democrat, not
OVERLY partisan.
Has taken some stances against
the administration on some
things that -- so she's a middle
of the road old time blue dog
Democrat maybe.
He's moving in there.
So that's a challenge.
>>> It sounds as though 9th
Circuit Court of Appeals has
gone ahead and said Andrew
Thomas, Lisa AUBUSHON, you're
not immune from prosecution in
your duties as prosecutors.
It sounds like the 9th circuit
said when you filed that civil
racketeering suit against
everyone and his brother you
were acting in a political
matter.
>> that's been their argument
all along through the disbarment
and all the ethics hearings.
We were acting in that capacity
so we can be sued.
I think another step back for
Thomas and his gubernatorial
aspirations.
>> We have to mention Andrew
Thomas.
He's one of the few that has
said I'm running.
If he's liable for some of these
lawsuits, what does that do to a
come pain?
>> I don't think it dissuades
anyone who already supports him.
He has ardent supporters.
After the disbarment, after the
lawsuits, after the allegations,
just after the whole thing, they
support him lock, stock and
barrel.
But in terms of what it means
for the broader electorate I
think this is just another thing
-- I guess another black Mark on
him as a potential candidate.
No one in the Republican
establishment takes him
seriously as a candidate.
We have seen time and time again
they have chosen their candidate
and the upstart comes in and
wins.
The challenge is to make sure he
gets on the ballot so he can be
further considered.
>> Has he responded to this
9th circuit decision?
>> He posted a statement on
Facebook where he claimed he was
railroaded, claimed this was yet
another example of traditional
corruption.
Listed a series of decisions
that the 9th circuit, which
issued this ruling, that the
9th circuit has issued in
recent years that he disagrees
with.
Some of which have been either
upheld by the Supreme Court or
the Supreme Court has not over
turned the 9th circuit on and
says as governor of Arizona a
state official he will work to
reform the judiciary apparently
in San Francisco in the federal
9th circuit.
It's a little unclear in terms
of how that would happen.
He held up this rooming and the
past ruling as judicial
corruption.
>> But does that indicate the
fact that this is such an
ideological campaign?
Potential governor of Arizona is
going to somehow impact the
federal judiciary.
Are we just talking about
simple, straightforward
ideology, everything else get
out of the way?
>> I think so.
A guy like Thomas, a candidate
is effective when he's dealing
with issues that he maybe
appeals to the Republican base
in Arizona.
He's been effective when he
talks about immigration.
When he talks about himself, it
happened to him in both A.G.
runs which he lost, when you're
dealing with that, when
conservative idealogues like
that they lose their muster,
their juice.
>> It sounds like independent
elections for Phoenix and
Tucson.
First of all explain what was
going on here.
The legislature weaned those
things on the ballot for the
generals and the city was saying
we'll get lost on the ballots.
They fought it and kind of won.
>> they did win.
The court essentially said the
city of Tucson only the cities
of Tucson and Philippine theirs
can hold their elections
whenever they want because they
are chartered governments and
they can decide when to hold
their elections.
That's basically what allowed
them to not skirt but not have
to follow the law.
This law was created a few years
ago.
It was meant to coordinates with
the general election.
Among the reasons typically
community municipal elections
are low turnout.
Another reason by consulting
elections we would save on
costs.
Obviously if you're not having
to have these elections in other
years that you're saving money.
The court basically said, well,
we're not so sure about whether
this would actually save money.
We're not so sure about the fact
that it would it might increase
voter participation but we're
not so sure.
The court also mentioned that
the length of the ballot created
by consolidating these elections
could be a disservice in fact to
voters who may fill up the first
one, two pages but not the six
or seven.
Do remember Linda gray has
fought against this law,
bringing about five, six pages
saying this is what we have now.
You're going to add few more
pages to this one.
>> Basically the idea is to get
more people to participate.
The judge said the ballot could
be so long you would have fewer
people voting.
>> that's right.
If you look in Maricopa County
the last general election, with
judge retention, ballot
propositions, federal
candidates, all of the stuff
that's already on there, you had
a ballot that was 200 items
long.
If you're going to add more you
can already see it as you go
down the ballot, fewer and fewer
votes are cast the deeper you
get into the ballot.
The judge said there's no way to
guarantee this will increase
voter turnout.
This may have the unintended
effect of having fewer people
vote.
They will get tired, I'm done,
I'm going to stop.
>> Some argue it will make it
more partisan, all the partisan
races and presidential and even
number years, city elections are
supposed to be nonpartisan.
They not always are as we
witnessed by the city of Phoenix
the last few cycles.
If folks want to change the
elections of Phoenix and Tucson
they can change the charter,
elect mayors and council
members, take it to the voters
and change it that way.
It's not like the door is
totally closed.
It comes to the frequent fight
between the state legislature an
big cities.
It is part of that too.
>> Basically the judge, there
was a constitutional aspect to
this but did the judge even
mention that?
>> The judge basically punted.
He said he's not going to rule
on it.
That's one of the things that
Tucson and Phoenix had argued
was that this is
unconstitutional.
It grants charter cities the
ability to govern themselves,
have more control over how they
are governed.
They had a constitutional ruling
on a case a few years ago that
involved Tucson elections and
changing the way those are
conducted.
The court said, no, you can't do
this.
This goes against the charter
government system.
That's one of the arguments put
forward and the judge said, no,
I'm not going to weigh in on
that.
That's why it only applies to
Tucson and Phoenix.
He didn't enjoin the law for
every other city.
>>> Luigi, who is representative
Bob Thorpe and why does he keep
stepping in it?
>> He's a representative from
the northern part of the state,
first time legislator if I'm not
mistaken, he's considered to be
more I'd logically driven, more
tea party type of can date.
He's Waded into other
controversies before.
During the session he had
written a letter to all the
house members and staffers
basically saying, complaining
about support for or the push
for Medicaid expansion and he
listed specific names of
colleagues he thought were
supportive of the government's
proposal.
He was -- Mr. Tobin said
essentially no, you can't do
that.
He's a freshman.
He's not exactly immune to
controversy.
He's done it before.
Now it seems like he's done it
again.
>> he did it because of some
tweets, racially insensitive
tweets, correct?
>> The Justice Department, irk
holder, issued some executive
orders to lessen drug penalties
to have less jail time for
nonviolent drug offenders, and
Mr. Thorpe tweeted that, well,
that policy will help
african-americans, Mr. holder's
African.
That's his motivation.
Race is a big part of the drug
war.
African-American males,
african-americans make up a
widely disproportionate amount
of folks arrested for drug
crimes, convicted of drug
crimes, lots much studies on
disparity treatment between
whites an Hispanics and
african-americans in drug
sentencing, in drug laws.
Race is an issue there.
Mr. Thorpe took a rather
insensitive approach to that and
Drew a connection between the
race of the Attorney General and
folks that the change in policy
might benefit.
>> that's not all.
There's a rodeo clown involved
here.
>> yes, another tweet that was
sent out the same day, this I a
few days ago, that essentially
expressed support for he
characterized as a crowd
pleasing rodeo clown at the
Missouri state fair dressed up
in a mask of President Obama
that had become kind of --
Missouri state fair board says
that wasn't a good thing and
they disciplined the rodeo
clowns, sent them all to
sensitivity training, fired one
of the clowns, gave him a
lifetime ban.
The result was Democrats and
liberals in Arizona started
making hay with it publicly and
getting into twitter discussions
with him over twitter about it.
He was defending it.
Eventually he decided I've had
enough of this.
I'm going to make it private and
start blocking liberals and
members of the media from
viewing my account.
That all happened in the span of
about four hours.
>> there wasn't one of those
apologies that reads to anyone
who was offended I'm sorry as
opposed to a blanket apology.
>> he took down the tweets so
they weren't misunderstood.
A lot of conservatives have
called this a free speech thing,
political satire and parody.
It was accompanied by those
Justice Department tweets also.
>> This is the same man who
invited a body armor salesman to
the legislature to do like a
demonstration?
>> Yes.
During the session when they
were talking about ways to
ensure school safety one idea
was if we're talking about
school safety we may as well
talk about safety in the state
legislature.
It's an open body.
Anyone can come in.
While both chambers have rules
that say you can't bring a gun
into the chamber no one is
checking that.
They don't have melts detectors.
He said let's have a
bullet-proof vest party in the
house basement and quickly
aborted the idea after a couple
of criticisms.
>> We'll stop it there.
Good stuff.
Thanks for joining us.
That is it for now.
I'm Ted Simons.
Thank you for joining us.
You have a great weekend.
>>> "Arizona Horizon" made
possible by contributions from
the friends of 8, members of
your Arizona PBS station.
Thank you.
>>> Support for 8 comes from
viewers like you and from --
>> The persian room, travel to
another world, to a land of
exotic aromas and period decor
for a fine dining experience.
The persian room on Scottsdale
road one light north of frank
Lloyd Wright boulevard.
Gourmet exotic cuisine at is
best.
>>> friendship village Tempe
offers independent living with
residency options, lifelong
learning classes and continuing
care.
>>> Phoenix theater presents
rent August 21 through September
Rent, a pop culture phenomenon
about finding your voice and
living for today.
Tickets at Phoenixtheater.com.
>>> 8H.D., 8 life and 8 world,
support the by viewers like you.
Thank you.
>>> later on 8H.D. --
>> When the beatles were
introduced to producer George
Mantini was unimpressed.
They would go on to
revolutionize music.
It's the story of one of the
most celebrated record producers
of all time.
>> You don't have any rules
except you're in college.
>> Produced by George Martin.
on 8H.D.
>>> Coming up on 8H.D., 8 life
and 8 world --
>> Coming soon to 8HD.
>> Next time on POV, learn about
the Israeli occupation from a
different perspective.
From the mouths of the men who
devised its legal framework.
>> The law in these parts.
Only on POV.
on
8H.D.
>>> We need to put on a show!
[Singing]
>> Support for 8 comes from
viewers like you and from --
>> Whitfield nursery, proud to
support 8 Arizona PBS, a valley
tradition since 1946, over 200
acres of Arizona grown trees,
citrus and palms complete custom
design and installation and
Whitfield nursery still does the
digging.
>> In 1998 the people of Arizona
created clean elections to
improve the integrity of Arizona
state government
By diminishing the influence of
big money.