This Dissertation Has Been 64—10452

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

This Dissertation Has Been 64—10452 THE GOVERNOR AS CHIEF LEGISLATOR IN ARIZONA Item Type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Morey, Roy Douglas, 1937- Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 11/10/2021 04:15:40 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/284544 This dissertation has been 64—10,452 microfilmed exactly as received MOREY, Roy Douglas, 1937— THE GOVERNOR AS CHIEF LEGISLATOR IN ARIZONA. University of Arizona, Ph.D., 1964 Political Science, general University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan Copyright by ROY DOUGLAS MOREY 1964 THE GOVERNOR AS CHIEF LEGISLATOR IN ARIZONA Roy D6.vMorey A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 19 6 4 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA GRADUATE COLLEGE I hereby recommend that this dissertation prepared under my direction by Roy D. Morey entitled The Governor as Ohief Legislator In Arizona be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy After inspection of the dissertation, the following members of the Final Examination Committee concur in its approval and recommend its acceptance:* .£ l! A-u* kjf \/Jf JSU*1 rf / J *This approval and acceptance is contingent on the candidate's adequate per£o£»aai£ce and defense of this dissertation at the final oral examination. The inclusion of this sheet bound into the library copy of the dissertation is evidence of satisfactory performance at the final examination. STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This dissertation has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this dissertation are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or repro­ duction from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the copyright holder. SIGNED: Copyright by Roy Dv Morey 1964 PREFACE Despite the efforts of the constitutional framers to separate the functions of government, the legislative process is a continuous fabric in which the legislative and executive branches mesh their activities. The preparation and initiation of legislation is not within the exclusive domain of the legislature. In fact the twentieth century executive is the most highly regarded participant in the process of lawmaking. Nowadays students of politics assume that the governor will strive to become the state's chief legislator. Since statehood Arizona has had governors who have been described as being either effective or ineffective leg­ islative leaders. The purpose of this study is to probe the various tools of formal and informal influence to determine the basis of legislative leadership. Arizona is especially suited for such an inquiry because the fundamental structure of the governor's office has not changed substantially since 1912, nor have the formal legislative tools. Hence there is an opportunity to employ an historical-comparative method of analysis. Although each governor must be viewed in his proper historical perspective, it is possible to compare and iii iv correlate the raw data of his legislative role. His position viz a viz the legislature has not been altered. The historical-comparative method will be supple­ mented by quantitative analysis. Lest one be misled, it is not my belief that all knowledge about politics can be re­ duced to a numerical product. Quantitative method can be valuable however, if it is used with prudence and moderation. It provides the common denominator essential to comparative research. Also it serves as a means of condensing enormous quantities of research into manageable and meaningful limits. Research in Arizona politics is truly a mixed blessing. Because there has been so little done in this area, the re­ searcher has the advantage of plowing a virgin terrain of inquiry which is both fertile and abundant. On the other hand, he must assume the handicap of being without source material in charting his exploration. Because of this latter limitation, the reader will notice a conspicuous absence of secondary sources used in this study and a reliance on per­ sonal observations, official records, and interviews. Although it would be impossible to list all who have contributed to the preparation of this dissertation, I would be remiss if I did not mention a few. My interest in this subject.was initially pursued while I was a Fellow in State Government of the National Center for Education in Politics in 1961-1962. For an eight month period I was special V legislative assistant to Governor Paul J. Fannin. Thanks to the aid and encouragement of Governor Fannin, his admin­ istrative assistant, John M. McGowan, and numerous members of the legislature, I received the most rewarding political experience of my life. A special note of appreciation is extended to Pro­ fessor Oonrad Joyner of the Department of Government, who generously gave of his time and ideas in directing the re­ search and writing of this dissertation. Also I am grateful for the able assistance of Professors Ourrin "V. Shields and David A. Bingham of the Department of Government who read the entire manuscript and made suggestions regarding style and substance. My most imposing debt is to my wife, Delores, who has been my most faithful assistant throughout the past five years of graduate study. In the preparation of this disser­ tation she acted in the capacity of researcher, typist and editor. For these reasons, and others too numerous to men­ tion, this study is dedicated to her. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE LIST OF TABLES . viii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS i... x ABSTRACT xi I. INTRODUCTION 1 Evolution of the Governor's Legislative Role *'• • * • • 2 Constitutional Confusion 5 Bridging the Gap 8 The Concept of Leadership 10 Scope 13 II. THE POLITICAL SETTING 17 Democratic Domination 17 Emergence of a Two-Party System 21 The Constitutional Period 31 The Executive Article 34 The Legislature 40 Summary 52 III. THE GOVERNOR AS LEGISLATIVE PARTICIPANT: THE EXECUTIVE VETO 56 Introduction 56 Reasons for Disapproval 61 Use and Success 65 The Item Veto 73 The .Threat of Veto 77 Summary 80 IV. TEE GOVERNOR AS POLICY INITIATOR: RECOMMENDATIONS AND SPECIAL SESSIONS 83 The Power to Recommend 84 The Special Session 107 Summary 124 vi vii CHAPTER PAGE V. THE GOVERNOR AS CHIEF EXECUTIVE: THE LEGISLATIVE IMPACT OF ADMINISTRATION 128 The Power of Appointment and Removal 130 The Supervisory Function 141 Budgeting 148 Summary 1 65 VI. THE GOVERNOR AS LEGISLATIVE BARGAINER: THE INFORMAL TOOLS 168 The Legislative Environment 168 Altering the Legislative Environment 173 Dispensing Favors 177 The "Governor's Lobby" „ 182 Conferences and Consultation 185 The Role as Party Chief 187 The Role as Popular Leader 191 Summary 1 96 VII. EXECUTIVE-LEGISLATIVE RELATIONS IN ACTION: A CASE STUDY 200 The 1961 Experience in Legislative Relations* 201 " Gathering Ideas 202 The Process of Elimination 209 Molding the Message .".... 215 The End Product 218 Presentation and Reaction 224 Delegating the Work Load 226 Directing the Lobby 230 Late Session Scramble 233 Post Mortem 234 - - VIII. THE GOVERNOR AS CHIEF LEGISLATOR 238 Evaluation of Constitutional Powers 239 Evaluation of Extra-Constitutional Powers ... 243 Gubernatorial Impotency 244 Leadership Roles .. 247 The Nature of Legislative Leadership 250 The Next Decade 254 BIBLIOGRAPHY 257 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE CHAPTER II I Support Received by Republican Gubernatorial Candidates from Pima and Maricopa Counties, 1946-1962 24 II Presidential and Gubernatorial Candidates Con­ currently Carrying the State, 1916-1960 32 III Party Complexion of the Governorship and Legislature, 1912-1960 41 IV Party Strength in the Arizona Legislature, 1912-1963 45 V Party Split of Metropolitan Members 45 VI Composition of Majority and Minority Blocs, 1955-1963 47 CHAPTER III I Volume of Legislation and Vetoes During Regular and Special Sessions, 1912—1963 61 II Governor's R.easons for Vetoing Bills, 1941-1963 62 III Item Vetoes Used during Regular and Special Sessions, 1912-1963 75 CHAPTER IV I Most Frequently Recurring Recommendations Made in Governor's Messages, Regular Sessions, 1912-1963 95 II Legislative Action on Specific Recommendations Made in Governor's Messages, Regular Sessions, 1912-1963 105 III Legislative Action on Specific Recommendations Made in Governor's Messages, Special Sessions, 1912-1963 122 IV Legislative Action on Specific Recommendations Made in Governor's Messages, Regular Sessions, 1912-t963 122 V Special Sessions Categorized by the Number of Requests Included in the Governor's Call, 1912-1963 124 viii ix TABLE PAGE CHAPTER V I Senate Action on Gubernatorial Appointments, 1912-1963 132 CHAPTER VII I Legislative Action on the 1962 Program of Governor Paul Fannin „ 236 LIST OP ILLUSTRATIONS FIGURE PAGE CHAPTER III 1 Vetoes of Governor's of Arizona During Regular and Special Sessions, 1912-1963 68 CHAPTER IV 1 Frequency of Special Sessions, Arizona Legislature, 1912-1963 112 CHAPTER V 1 Arizona Budget Calendar 151 x: . ABSTRACT Students of state government have "become increasingly aware of the political role of the governor. While the polit­ ical role encompasses all roles assumed by the governor, it is especially associated with and dependent upon the gover­ nor's legislative role. Traditionally the effectiveness of the governor has been measured by careful and casual observers in terms of legislative leadership. It is generally agreed that the basis for such leadership is similar to our national chief executive.
Recommended publications
  • Regulating Our Mischievous Factions: Presidential Nominations and the Law Andrew Pierce Goldstein & Phillips
    Kentucky Law Journal Volume 78 | Issue 2 Article 4 1989 Regulating Our Mischievous Factions: Presidential Nominations and the Law Andrew Pierce Goldstein & Phillips Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/klj Part of the Election Law Commons Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits you. Recommended Citation Pierce, Andrew (1989) "Regulating Our Mischievous Factions: Presidential Nominations and the Law," Kentucky Law Journal: Vol. 78 : Iss. 2 , Article 4. Available at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/klj/vol78/iss2/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Kentucky Law Journal by an authorized editor of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Regulating Our Mischievous Factions: Presidential Nominations and the Law By ANDREW PIERCE* TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................. 312 I. BRIEF HISTORY OF PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATIONS ....... 314 II. PROCEDURAL AND SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES INVOLVED IN CHALLENGES TO PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION PROCEDURES .................................................... 316 A. Substantive Grounds for Challenging Party A ctions .................................................... 316 1. Constitutional Challenges ...................... 316 2. Statutory Challenges ............................. 318 3. Party Rules ......................................... 319 B. Procedural Issues ......................................
    [Show full text]
  • Insider's Guidetoazpolitics
    olitics e to AZ P Insider’s Guid Political lists ARIZONA NEWS SERVICE ARIZONA CAPITOL TIMES • Arizona Capitol Reports FEATURING PROFILES of Arizona’s legislative & congressional districts, consultants & public policy advocates Statistical Trends The chicken Or the egg? WE’RE EXPERTS AT GETTING POLICY MAKERS TO SEE YOUR SIDE OF THE ISSUE. R&R Partners has a proven track record of using the combined power of lobbying, public relations and advertising experience to change both minds and policy. The political environment is dynamic and it takes a comprehensive approach to reach the right audience at the right time. With more than 50 years of combined experience, we’ve been helping our clients win, regardless of the political landscape. Find out what we can do for you. Call Jim Norton at 602-263-0086 or visit us at www.rrpartners.com. JIM NORTON JEFF GRAY KELSEY LUNDY STUART LUTHER 101 N. FIRST AVE., STE. 2900 Government & Deputy Director Deputy Director Government & Phoenix, AZ 85003 Public Affairs of Client Services of Client Public Affairs Director Development Associate CONTENTS Politics e to AZ ARIZONA NEWS SERVICE Insider’s Guid Political lists STAFF CONTACTS 04 ARIZONA NEWS SERVICE BEATING THE POLITICAL LEGISLATIVE Administration ODDS CONSULTANTS, DISTRICT Vice President & Publisher: ARIZONA CAPITOL TIMES • Arizona Capitol Reports Ginger L. Lamb Arizonans show PUBLIC POLICY PROFILES Business Manager: FEATURING PROFILES of Arizona’s legislative & congressional districts, consultants & public policy advocates they have ‘the juice’ ADVOCATES,
    [Show full text]
  • Party and Non-Party Political Committees Vol. II State and Local Party Detailed Tables
    FEC REPORTS ON FINANCIAL ACTIVITY 1989 - 1990 FINAL REPORT .. PARTY AND NON-PARTY POLITICAL COKMITTEES VOL.II STATE AND LOCAL PARTY DETAILED TABLES FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 999 E Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20463 OCTOBER 1991 I I I I I I I I FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Commissioners John w. McGarry, Chairman Joan D. Aikens, Vice Chairman Lee Ann Elliott, Thomas J. Josefiak Danny L. McDonald Scott E. Thomas Donnald K. Anderson, Ex Officio Clerk of the u.s. House of Representatives Walter J. Stewart Secretary of the Senate John C. Surina, Staff Director Lawrence M. Noble, General Counsel Comments and inquiries about format should be addressed to the Reports Coordinator, Data System Development Division, who coordinated the production of this REPORT. Copies of 1989-1990 FINAL REPORT, PARTY AND NON-PARTY POLITICAL COMMITTEES, may be obtained b writing to the Public Records Office, Federal Election Commission, 999 E Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20463. Prices are: VOL. I - $10.00, VOL. II - $10.00, VOL. III - $10.00, VOL IV - $10.00. Checks should be made payable to the Federal Election Commission. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. DESCRIPTION OF REPORT iv II. SUMMARY OF TABLES vi III. EXPLANATION OF COLUMNS viii IV. TABLES: SELECTED FINANCIAL ACTIVITY AND ASSISTANCE TO CANDIDATES, DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN STATE AND LOCAL POLITICAL COMMITTEES A. SELECTED FINANCIAL ACTIVITY OF DEMOCRATIC STATE AND LOCAL POLITICAL COMMITTEES AND THEIR ASSISTANCE TO CANDIDATES BY OFFICE AND PARTY Alabama 1 Missouri 37 Colorado 7 New York 43 Idaho 13 Ohio 49 Kansas 19
    [Show full text]
  • REPUBLICAN PARTY, ET AL., Petitioners, V
    Nos. 19-1257 & 19-1258 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States MARK BRNOVICH, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ARIZONA, ET AL., Petitioners, v. DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, ET AL., Respondents. ARIZONA REPUBLICAN PARTY, ET AL., Petitioners, v. DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, ET AL., Respondents. On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit BRIEF FOR PRIVATE PETITIONERS BRETT W. JOHNSON MICHAEL A. CARVIN COLIN P. AHLER Counsel of Record TRACY A. OLSON YAAKOV M. ROTH SNELL & WILMER L.L.P. ANTHONY J. DICK 400 E. Van Buren St. E. STEWART CROSLAND Suite 1900 STEPHEN J. KENNY Phoenix, AZ 85004 STEPHEN J. PETRANY JONES DAY 51 Louisiana Ave., NW Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 879-3939 [email protected] Counsel for Petitioners i QUESTIONS PRESENTED Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act prohibits voting practices that “result[] in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen ... to vote on account of race or color.” 52 U.S.C. § 10301(a). Such a discriminatory “result” occurs if an election is not “equally open to participation” by racial minorities, giving them “less opportunity than other members of the electorate to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice.” Id. § 10301(b). Arizona gives all citizens an equal opportunity to vote in person or by mail, and authorizes ballots to be turned in by a family member, household member, or caregiver. In the decision below, however, the Ninth Circuit held that Arizona violated § 2 by (1) requiring in-person voters to cast ballots in their assigned precincts; and (2) prohibiting “ballot-harvesting,” i.e., third-party collection and return of ballots.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014-I-04] Contact: Earl De Berge Research Director [email protected] Jim Haynes President/CEO [email protected]
    behavior research center’s Rocky Mountain Poll NEWS RELEASE [RMP 2014-I-04] Contact: Earl de Berge Research Director [email protected] Jim Haynes President/CEO [email protected] JOB PERFORMANCE RATINGS SENATOR McCAIN STILL IN A SLUMP SENATOR FLAKE RATINGS IMPROVE Phoenix, Arizona, February13, 2014 Should U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) decide to run for re-election in 2016, he may face a tough struggle to convince voters to stay the course with him. Voter attitudes toward his performance in Washington remain sharply divided with 37 percent applauding his efforts but 33 percent giving him a thumbs down. What is more, the proportion rating his performance as “poor” rose to 33 percent in January from 26 percent this past summer. Another 23 percent classify his job performance as only “fair” which overall means that the combined percent who rate his performance as “fair” or “poor” stands at 56 percent. Perhaps more ominous to his chances for being re-nominated by his party for a sixth term, is the finding that the proportion of registered Republicans who rate his performance as “poor” rose to 38 percent in January from only 27 percent last summer. Simultaneously, the proportion of Republicans who gave him favorable job ratings fell to 34 percent from 38 percent last summer. Evidence that Senator McCain continues to cause some Republicans to scratch their heads was also seen recently when he was censored by the Arizona Republican Party for being “too associated with liberal Democrats.” The Senator responded to the censorship saying that he had a strong conservative voting record and that being censored by the party may only embolden him to seek a sixth term in 2016 when he turns 80.
    [Show full text]
  • BRNOVICH V. DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE
    (Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2020 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus BRNOVICH, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ARIZONA, ET AL. v. DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 19–1257. Argued March 2, 2021—Decided July 1, 2021* Arizona law generally makes it very easy to vote. Voters may cast their ballots on election day in person at a traditional precinct or a “voting center” in their county of residence. Ariz. Rev. Stat. §16–411(B)(4). Arizonans also may cast an “early ballot” by mail up to 27 days before an election, §§16–541, 16–542(C), and they also may vote in person at an early voting location in each county, §§16–542(A), (E). These cases involve challenges under §2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) to aspects of the State’s regulations governing precinct-based election- day voting and early mail-in voting. First, Arizonans who vote in per- son on election day in a county that uses the precinct system must vote in the precinct to which they are assigned based on their address. See §16–122; see also §16–135.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of the Digital Political Advertising Network
    PLATFORMS AND OUTSIDERS IN PARTY NETWORKS: THE EVOLUTION OF THE DIGITAL POLITICAL ADVERTISING NETWORK Bridget Barrett A thesis submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts at the Hussman School of Journalism and Media. Chapel Hill 2020 Approved by: Daniel Kreiss Adam Saffer Adam Sheingate © 2020 Bridget Barrett ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Bridget Barrett: Platforms and Outsiders in Party Networks: The Evolution of the Digital Political Advertising Network (Under the direction of Daniel Kreiss) Scholars seldom examine the companies that campaigns hire to run digital advertising. This thesis presents the first network analysis of relationships between federal political committees (n = 2,077) and the companies they hired for electoral digital political advertising services (n = 1,034) across 13 years (2003–2016) and three election cycles (2008, 2012, and 2016). The network expanded from 333 nodes in 2008 to 2,202 nodes in 2016. In 2012 and 2016, Facebook and Google had the highest normalized betweenness centrality (.34 and .27 in 2012 and .55 and .24 in 2016 respectively). Given their positions in the network, Facebook and Google should be considered consequential members of party networks. Of advertising agencies hired in the 2016 electoral cycle, 23% had no declared political specialization and were hired disproportionately by non-incumbents. The thesis argues their motivations may not be as well-aligned with party goals as those of established political professionals. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES .................................................................................................................... V POLITICAL CONSULTING AND PARTY NETWORKS ...............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • AZ GOP Precinct Committee Handbook
    Chairman’s Letter 2013 PRECINCT COMMITTEEMAN Welcome to the 2013 AZGOP Precinct Committeeman Victory Handbook. VICTORY HANDBOOK As a fellow Republican Precinct Committeeman and a longtime conservative activist, I am excited to join with you in achieving our goal of Republican victories in Arizona in 2014. As a Precinct Committeeman, you are a neighborhood leader. This handbook will help provide you with the information you need when you are canvassing your neighborhood, registering new voters, talking to people about our Republican Party platform, and helping our candidates reach out to meet voters in your area. More resources are available by attending your legislative district or county party meetings, and I encourage you to visit our website at www.azgop.org to subscribe to our frequent news updates. The upcoming 2013 municipal elections and the 2014 election will be unlike any other: we have new leadership, we have new technology, and we have a great plan. We are not only harnessing our traditional grassroots efforts but we are now using the latest tools and technology in our efforts to grow our party and engage the electorate in support of our platform and our candidates. As you well know, our future is at stake. Our work through the Republican Party is one of the most visible and important ways to ensure our liberties are preserved and that our future will be one of opportunity and prosperity. This is our common goal. Not only must we aggressively defend the leadership positions currently held by Re- publicans at the state level, we have a chance to win elections in three of the most competitive congressional races in the country.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona 2018 General Election Publicity Pamphlet
    ARIZONA 2018 GENERAL ELECTION PUBLICITY PAMPHLET NOVEMBER 6, 2018 NOVEMBER 6, 2018 GENERAL ELECTION TABLE OF Contents General Voting Information A Message to Voters from Secretary of State Michele Reagan .................................................................................. 4 Voter Registration Information .................................................................................................................................. 5 Online Voter Services ................................................................................................................................................ 5 Vote by Mail and In Person Early Voting ................................................................................................................... 6 Military and Overseas Voters ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Voter Accessibility ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 Alternative Pamphlet Formats.................................................................................................................................... 7 Polling Place/Vote Center Information ...................................................................................................................... 8 ID at the Polls – Bring It! ........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ARIZONA REPUBLICAN PARTY 3601 North 24M STREET, PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85016 (602) 967-7770 • Fta (602) 224-0932 • 1-8004444065 WWWAZGOPORG
    ARIZONA REPUBLICAN PARTY 3601 North 24m STREET, PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85016 (602) 967-7770 • Fta (602) 224-0932 • 1-8004444065 WWWAZGOPORG O -n -ni '••r •i October 10,2006 5 £ Office of General Comuel __ r-V- Fodcnl Elect OTCommiwon 999 ESn^NW, Washington, DC 20463 ui To Whom It May Concern I wnte to you today in my capacity as dniimm of the Arizona Republican Party in reference to2USC 437g(aXl)regazdmgDemocnt Candidate for Ccmgrest Ellen Simon It is my belief that Mi Simon is in violation of several laws and regulations pertaining to campaign finance Most troubling is the apparent attempt by Ms Simon to deceive voters about me troe nature of her cciitnbitnons to her own campaign On Ma Simon's July 14 filing she stated mat die was using "personal funds" m the amount of $275,000 as a contnbubon to her campaign But men on August 11 amendment, she changed me contnbution from a personal contnbution to a personal loan Honvever,classifymgthecontnbutionasa personal loan was a misrepresentation of the facts The coiitnbution funds were from a lenduiguisttimofi and collaterahzed by persorial assets On September 1, Ms Sunon finally disclosed me terms of the loan from Wells Fargo Bank This makes it clear mat Ms Simon intentionally filed a false report to the FEC on July 14 Any reasonable person recognizes that writing a check fixmi one's personal bank account u a personal contribution, while allying for arid trien receiving a loan rrom a bank is quite different Yet Ms Smum filed a cornpletely false report with the FEC on July 14, a clear violation of
    [Show full text]
  • October 24, 2007 Entitled ‘‘Modification of Class E Airspace; Services to Provide Maintenance Support for by Mr
    28158 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE, Vol. 153, Pt. 20 October 24, 2007 entitled ‘‘Modification of Class E Airspace; services to provide maintenance support for By Mr. BIDEN for the Committee on For- Monticello, IA’’ ((RIN2120–AA66)(Docket No. the Iraqi Government’s UH-1H helicopters; eign Relations. 07–ACE–3 page 27415)) received on October 19, to the Committee on Foreign Relations. *Henrietta Holsman Fore, of Nevada, to be 2007; to the Committee on Commerce, EC–3750. A communication from the Assist- Administrator of the United States Agency Science, and Transportation. ant Secretary, Office of Legislative Affairs, for International Development. EC–3740. A communication from the Pro- Department of State, transmitting, pursuant *George E. Pataki, of New York, to be a gram Analyst, Federal Aviation Administra- to law, the certification of a proposed tech- Representative of the United States of Amer- tion, Department of Transportation, trans- nical assistance agreement for the export of ica to the Sixty-second Session of the Gen- mitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule defense services and articles to Germany and eral Assembly of the United Nations. entitled ‘‘Recording of Major Repairs and the United Kingdom related to the Nemesis *Kelly G. Knight, of Kentucky, to be an Al- Major Alterations’’ ((RIN2120–AJ19)(Docket Multi-Band Viper Laser Based Directional ternate Representative of the United States No. FAA–2007–28631)) received on October 19, Infrared Countermeasures System; to the of America to the Sixty-second Session of 2007; to the Committee on Commerce, Committee on Foreign Relations. the General Assembly of the United Nations.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
    Clerk of the Superior Court *** Electronically Filed *** T. Hays, Deputy 12/21/2020 5:03:05 PM Filing ID 12356377 1 Howard Kleinhendler* 2 369 Lexington Ave. 12th Floor New York, New York 10017 3 Telephone: (917) 793-1188 [email protected] 4 *Pro Hac Vice Application Forthcoming 5 Alexander Michael del Rey Kolodin (030826) 6 Christopher Alfredo Viskovic (035860) KOLODIN LAW GROUP PLLC 7 3443 N. Central Ave. Ste 1009 Phoenix, AZ 85012 8 Telephone: (602) 730-2985 9 Facsimile: (602) 801-2539 Email: 10 [email protected] [email protected] 11 [email protected] (file copies) 2539 - 12 Attorneys for Proposed Intervenors 13 (Additional counsel on signature page) 14 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA 2985 / Facsimile: (602) 801 - 15 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA Phoenix, Arizona 85012 16 MARICOPA COUNTY, et al.; Case No. CV2020-016840 3443 North Central Avenue Suite 1009 17 Plaintiffs, Telephone: 730 (602) KOLODIN LAW GROUP KOLODINLAWPLLC GROUP 18 v. MOTION TO INTERVENE 19 KAREN FANN, et al.; 20 Defendants, 21 TYLER BOWYER, NANCY COTTLE, JAKE 22 HOFFMAN, ANTHONY KERN, 23 CHRISTOPHER M. KING, JAMES R. LAMON, SAM MOORHEAD, ROBERT 24 MONTGOMERY, LORAINE PELLEGRINO, GREG SAFSTEN, SALVATORE LUKE 25 SCARMARDO, KELLI WARD, MICHAEL 26 WARD, MICHAEL JOHN BURKE; 27 Proposed-Intervenors. 28 1 Under Rule 24, individuals and entities may intervene in an action either as of right 2 or with permission of the Court. Although the two intervention rubrics contemplate 3 different criteria, Arizona courts have long recognized that Rule 24 as a whole “is remedial 4 and should be construed liberally in order to assist parties seeking to obtain justice in 5 protecting their rights.” Planned Parenthood Ariz., Inc.
    [Show full text]