Nation needs complete Supreme Court
Both of Arizonaβs senators have decided that it is proper to wait until after the election to work on confirmation of the Supreme Court nominee.
What will happen if there are constitutional questions about the election and the Supreme Court cannot achieve a majority decision because it lacks the ninth judge? Remember the Gore/Bush election decision by the Supreme Court was not that long ago.
The question of the Obama executive order on immigration may also not be decided. There may be other decisions that will be postponed β how long?
Can our nation survive a serious constitutional crisis without a complete Supreme Court? Isnβt it the obligation of the Senate to anticipate and address this catastrophe quickly?
Pat Desai
North side
Lawmakers keep state from its potential
Do our governor and Legislature believe weβre stupid? We allow the power of money to usurp sound policy and lawmaking. Money influences elections and bills. We allow politicians to cut taxes and sweep monies from our roads, schools and courts.
Then once they have us βover the barrelβ they offer (1) a controversial funding mechanism for schools in exchange for legislative changes altering our powers, and (2) a promise to restore funding to the courts in exchange for an expansion in the number of Supreme Court justices, even though the justices feel expansion is unnecessary.
The American Legislative Exchange Council lists Arizona as fifth in the country for economic outlook citing our βlower taxes, fewer regulations and right-to-work laws.β
A great outlook, but weβve been looking to attract new businesses and jobs for years. We have cut taxes and intend more cuts. Without good roads and schools we may never attract them.
Guy Brunt
West side
State deserves better than Prop. 123
Our teachers and students cannot wait for our legislature to obey the Proposition 301 law, upheld by Arizona courts. But, they deserve better than Proposition 123.
Why should our Legislature and governor be rewarded for their willful disregard for Arizona voters and blatant illegal violation of Proposition 301?
Prop. 123 is a short-term scheme with many hidden negative funding provisions. Interest from the state land trust currently provides $80 million to public education annually. The trust could be drained in about a decade when Prop. 123 depletes the trustβs principal. In our anti-education environment, what could possibly go wrong ?
Proposition 301 needs to be restored. To immediately help teachers and students, our Legislature and governor should release a majority of Arizonaβs $600 million budget surplus. In November, voters need to select new leadership.
Kathy Krucker
Midtown
Citizens should benefit from solar energy
Re: the April 16 article βInitiative seeks to block solar use βdemand chargesβ.β
It is yet another commentary on the sad state of Arizona government that we apparently need a constitutional amendment to guarantee Arizonansβ right to benefit from solar energy.
The Nobel Prize-winning chemist Frederick Soddy listed energy along with βdiscoveryβ (i.e. advances in human knowledge) as principle ingredients in the formation of wealth.
But, taking a page from the nationβs too big to fail (TBTF) banks, the stateβs utilities have apparently decided that they alone should benefit from the generation of electricity.
When the TBTF banks realized they could have the Federal Reserve create interest-free money to balance their books, they decided to stop paying depositors for the use of their money.
When Arizonaβs utilities discovered they could use the Arizona Corporation Commission to repeal the laws of physics (favoring distributed electricity generation), they decided to stop paying their solar customers even what they charged their non-solar neighbors for excess power they generated and sent next door.
Steven Lesh
East side
