DAVID'S PUBLISHED ARTICLES

Spare education and be open about deep budget cuts

Tough Times Call for Unified Approach

Politicians should not set learning standards

Bipartisan legislators accomplished much

Fund programs to give gifted students challenges they need

Legislators' attitude harmful to tech schools

DUI amendments would address growing problem

Legislative leaders try to stifle opposing views

State has obligation to retain best teachers

It's not always the legislature's role to solve a problem

Voters helped new legislator make agenda

Not enough for schools

Robin Hood in reverse for Arizona students

Outlook for state’s kids gets grimmer

Spare education and be open about deep budget cuts
Published in The Arizona Republic February 21, 2009

Last week, in a Tempe Republic column, Editor Tom Spratt wrote that legislators owe it to constituents to share budget updates.

I couldn't agree more.

Legislative leaders have broken their promise to be open and transparent, and they have not addressed the impact of deep budget cuts to the people they will affect.

The fact is that the legislators who voted to pass the 2009 budget had not publicly discussed the impact of their decision with constituents, K-12 students, parents and teachers or with the universities.

They didn't even discuss it with legislative Democrats or rank-and-file Republicans before it was up for votes on the House and Senate floors.

Spratt wrote that legislators could do more - travel around their districts, meet with constituents, hold forums, answer questions and explain exactly what people should expect as a result of the cuts for this fiscal year and the proposals for the next fiscal year, which starts in July.

Legislative Democrats have hosted six public budget hearings in the last two months to discuss the impact of the deep budget cuts and to hear concerns of citizens in the community about the impact of the budget.

We've held these hearings in Casa Grande, Phoenix, Yuma, Tucson, Prescott and Flagstaff. Our seventh in this series will be on Monday at Arizona State University in Tempe, followed by hearings in Sierra Vista and at the University of Arizona in Tucson.

We hope to continue to hear from constituents and community members about how these cuts will impact their lives and the concerns they have about the 2010 budget.

I share the concern of many Arizonans with regard to the deep cuts to education for this fiscal year and those that are being proposed starting in July.

I have worked hard in recent weeks to get the word out about the education cuts. I meticulously detailed the proposed cuts in public Education Committee meetings and budget forums in Flagstaff, Tucson and Phoenix, and I will do so again at the public budget hearing on Feb. 23 in Tempe. At each forum, I went into great detail in publicly questioning school administrators and university presidents as to the impact of the proposed cuts on their schools.

In addition to participating in public meetings, I appeared on Channel 8's "Horizon," submitted an commentary regarding the budget to The Republic and responded to many reporter inquiries on the proposed education cuts, speaking extensively about potential impacts.

I also have made all of this information available on my website and in email updates to constituents who sign up there.

I fought hard for education on the House floor in the middle of the night, doing my best to convince my Republican colleagues that thousands of jobs will be lost and we would lose major parts of ASU, our community's economic engine. I also pleaded with them to consider the impact on student learning in our state.

I have worked hard to protect education in District 17 and in Arizona, and I always will.

I encourage all constituents to attend our public budget hearing on Monday from 6:30 to 9 p.m. at ASU's Memorial Union in Ventana Room 241. We will present detailed information on the budget and seek public comment.

Also, please take a moment to sign up on my website, www.DavidSchapira.com, to receive future budget updates and information.

State Rep. David Schapira, D-Tempe, represents District 17.

[Return to top]

Tough Times Call for Unified Approach
Published in The Arizona Republic January 9, 2009

The coming legislative session in Arizona promises to be the most turbulent in at least a decade. The ingredients of this recipe for disaster are laid out and ready to mix. Arizona's State Senators and Representatives will come together on Monday to start work. I am just as scared as you are, and I'm one of them.

But there is hope. There is still an element in the Legislature that truly wants to work in a bipartisan fashion to solve many of the problems that the state faces. There are those of us who are willing to work together, to negotiate and to do the job that our constituents elected us to do: represent them.

The most important issue we face as a state is the floundering economy. In much the same way it is affecting your pocketbook, it is affecting the state's. The greatest task or burden of the Forty-ninth Legislature is to balance the state's budget. We don't have the option, as the Federal government does, to simply print more money. We can't run deficits, nor should we. The state's constitution essentially ties our hands when it comes to borrowing money. Therefore, we really are only left with two options: cut funding or raise taxes.

Let's start by throwing out the tax increase, because it's not the solution for this crisis. First, it's just not the best idea in bad economic times. More importantly, it's virtually impossible in Arizona on the legislative level because of existing laws that require a 2/3 vote in both chambers to raise any tax or fee.

So it comes down to fund cutting, to the tune of about $3 Billion for the next fiscal year. As you can imagine, that's no small chunk of change. It's about 30% of the state's General Fund. So where do we find 30%? End health care for children? Release all the state's prisoners? Close a university or two?

There is no easy answer. It's too big a problem for one person, one party or one legislative chamber to solve. It will take all of us, the whole state (yes, even you), to figure this one out. But I'm confident that if we work together, we can get through this. We can use the bad ingredients to make something good, or at least tolerable, for the coming year.

That is my promise to you for the coming session. I will work together with anyone who is willing to work with me to come up with the best solutions to the problems we face. That being said, I will walk into budget negotiations with a set of priorities. I was elected because of my commitment to improving education in our state, and I am not ready to balance our state budget on the backs of students nor am I willing to eliminate vital funding for healthcare for kids whose parents can't afford it.

I also promise to never forget that the most important aspect of my job at the Legislature is to serve the people who elected me, whether you voted for me or not.

As my friend Congressman Harry Mitchell likes to say, "Representative is my title and my job description." I will do my best with that title to continue to represent your needs for the next two years.

State Rep. David Schapira, D-Tempe, represents District 17.

[Return to top]

Politicians should not set learning standards
Published in The East Valley Tribune May 25, 2008

Make no mistake. Our education system in Arizona is broken, but not beyond repair. From high drop-out rates, to teacher shortages, to the failures of the Arizona Instrument to Measure Standards, we're in a mess of trouble.

Have no fear, politicians are on the case. Curriculum mandates, pilot programs and voucher bills are churning out of the Legislature like smoke from a bonfire. In case the blunt reality of the failures of these political maneuvers hasn't hit you yet, let me tell you as someone who has spent much of my adult life in education that they're not working.

There has been much coverage recently of a bill that I sponsored in the Legislature to renew the state's program allowing high school seniors to augment their AIMS scores. AIMS augmentation requires participants to achieve good grades in their deficient subject, take the AIMS test every time it's offered and seek outside remediation or tutoring in order to enhance their score. The program has existed since AIMS first became a high-stakes test, but expired in January, which is why it required renewal.

The renewal of AIMS augmentation was crucial in order to allow 6,000 hardworking seniors, many of whom have been victimized by our broken system, to graduate. Most students who use AIMS augmentation are bright and diligent. Many are even college-bound.

Augmentation of exit exam scores is necessary in Arizona for many reasons, but mostly because of our failures. I mean "our" in the broadest possible sense - our state, our government, our administrators, our teachers, our parents and our students are failing.

What's the fix? How do we stop failing? The politically popular answers range from drastically increasing funding to getting parents more involved in their kids' education. Both of these concepts and many others could be parts of the solution, but the real answer lies in one simple concept: Refocus our education system on student learning.

Accountability is the new overarching principle of public education. We want to hold administrators, teachers and most importantly students accountable. But who are the accountants? I'll give you a hint: most of them haven't spent a day in a classroom in years or even decades.

Politicians and political appointees have taken the reigns of public education. Test scores are no longer simply a measure of a student's ability to absorb information or understand concepts, they are now a teetering point on which the jobs of teachers and principals hinge. Because politicians (myself included) often operate in a vacuum, we want empirical data from which we can draw conclusions to act upon.

This virus of government micromanagement has even spread to the federal level in the form of No Child Left Behind. By 2014, NCLB will require that countless Arizona schools fire principals and teachers whose students don't meet standards set by politicians a dozen years earlier and 2,000 miles away. We wonder why our schools are teaching students to pass a test rather than understand the material.

This has to end. Student learning must again be the priority of education. We must leave the setting of standards and curriculum to education professionals, not politicians. We must stop pushing educators to teach to the test. Our schools should be charged with teaching students to think critically, debate intelligently and understand profoundly.

Rep. David Schapira, D-Tempe, represents legislative District 17.

[Return to top]

Bipartisan legislators accomplished much
Published in The Arizona Republic June 29, 2007

This year's legislative session lasted 164 days.

That number ties last year for the fourth-longest session in Arizona history. Although the session was unnecessarily long, this year's Legislature accomplished more in 24 weeks than any other in recent history.

The most significant improvement in the 2007 session is that this year's budget is a bipartisan compilation that was premised on the best interests of the people of our state instead of personal and political motivations.

We passed a $10.6 billion budget that includes $46 million to be spent specifically on teacher salaries. The budget also includes the removal of the gag rule that prevented school officials from informing parents of their children's ability to get health care. We also passed much-needed growth funding to Arizona State University.

I am proud to have supported the bipartisan budget. It was a collaborative effort that included a large group of like-minded people who are focused on providing for Arizona's future. A vast majority of Arizona senators (Republicans and Democrats), the House Democratic caucus and Gov. Napolitano worked well together to develop this compromise. We can only hope that the parties will get together in a similar way next year.

My budgetary priority this session was more funding for education. I proposed a bill to set a statewide minimum teacher salary of $33,000. I introduced the idea of a teacher loan forgiveness program. I fought for Teach for America and Arizona Financial Aid Trust funding. I couldn't have predicted at the beginning of my tenure at the Legislature which of these line items I would be successful in helping to secure. We got pretty much all of them.

Thanks to a group of elected leaders who are working hard to move our state in the right direction, my message of better funding for our education system did not fall on deaf ears.

This budget was good for public education. Not only did we secure a $46million increase in teacher salaries, my teacher loan forgiveness bill was included in the budget as well. Now Arizonans who attend a state university and plan to teach in our state will have the opportunity to apply for a loan that will cover tuition and fees. If they graduate and teach math, science or special education in the state, we'll forgive their loans. In other words, if a student goes to ASU and then teaches in a subject of shortage in Arizona, we'll pay for his or her college education.

Although this session was very productive, there is a great deal of work yet to be done. We still need to come into compliance with the U.S. District Court's judgment against our state for failing to adequately fund English language learner education. Despite this and last year's increases, our state's education system and teacher salaries are still drastically under-funded. Our state also needs some serious health care reform.

But for now, Arizonans should be confident that the people's work is being done and more help is on the way.

[Return to top]

Fund programs to give gifted students challenges they need

Published in The Arizona Republic June 2, 2007

Invest in education. This is the mandate from voters to the elected leaders of our state. The education rhetoric at the state capitol runs deep. People talk about increased per-pupil spending, a need for smaller class sizes and hiring highly qualified teachers, but only small gains if any are made each year in these areas. Fortunately, our local school board members, administrators and leaders in education are fighting hard to make every dollar count.

Tempe Union High School District is on the cutting edge of innovative educational practices like the top-ranked Corona del Sol Robotics Program and the Peggy Payne Academy at McClintock. The next step is the implementation of a world-renowned gifted program at Tempe High School.

The International Baccalaureate (IB) Program is a rigorous series of courses and tests that go above and beyond advanced placement. IB students take courses using college level text books and curriculum and are required to complete a philosophy and logic class, an extended essay (thesis paper), an advanced level of foreign language courses and a considerable amount of community service. At the end of the program, students are also required to take subject exams covering six areas of study which are scored competitively on a 7-point scale using an international rubric.

IB is difficult to say the least, but gifted students need this type of challenge to prepare them for rigorous higher education programs. Offering advanced students in Tempe schools the opportunity to be challenged at this level in order to best prepare them for the future is the duty of our community.

Right now community and elected leaders are collecting funds to get the Tempe High IB Program off the ground. In fact, the city of Tempe has already contributed. Although the city’s donation is a great start, there is still a long way to go. The city and other groups are generously giving funds because little or no money is available from the state or the district to start the program.

Our state budget priorities are often misplaced on things like tax credits for the NBA or subsidies for the motion picture industry. We have teachers in this state making $24,000 per year, classrooms that are bursting at the seams, and we rank 50th in the country in what we spend on student learning. Until our legislature develops the political will to invest in our kids, each of us has to take personal responsibility to do what we can to improve public education in our community.

In the interest of full disclosure, I have been an advocate for the IB Program for many years. I was an IB student in high school, I am an IB graduate, and I was an IB teacher at North Canyon High School. That being said (or written), I believe that investment in the IB Program at Tempe High is a step in the right direction, but we must not forget our deficiencies in other areas of education in this state.

We must raise teacher salaries. We must reduce class sizes. We must fully fund education for English language learners. In the meantime, let’s give Tempe’s best and brightest students every opportunity possible by funding the IB program.

[Return to top]

Legislators' attitude harmful to tech schools

Published in The Arizona Republic May 16, 2007

People make mistakes. Politicians are no less prone to making mistakes than anyone else.

Thankfully, members of the Arizona Legislature have countless opportunities to correct our mistakes. Let's hope we do it.

In the current drafted versions of next year's budget, our elected leadership has proposed to cut funding for joint technological high school campuses, also know as JTEDs.

This year, these campuses are slated to receive much-needed funding for rapidly growing programs and new campuses. However, the Legislature is proposing cuts for equipment and supplies.

Proponents of the cuts are arguing that the general funding increase will mean a lot more money for technical education in our state.

Unfortunately, this money will not benefit existing schools that aren't facing rapid growth. This includes the East Valley Institute of Technology (EVIT), which many Tempe students attend. EVIT, for example, will receive little to none of the new funding. Meanwhile, they'll lose up to $2.5 million with the cuts in resource money.

JTED schools teach students high-tech vocational skills to help make them competitive in a job market focused on innovation and technology.

They also provide students with a valuable hands-on learning environment. A student who completes a JTED program leaves high school with a strong professional work ethic and a solid foundation for post-secondary work.

This is not the area from which to cut. We are smack dab in the midst of a new economy that requires workers entering the job market to be well-equipped with technical skills.

Students who attend JTED campuses like EVIT choose these campuses because they have a specific interest in technologically based careers. We owe these students the opportunity to pursue knowledge in these fields with the necessary resources.

More students every year express interest in attending JTEDs, but state money to help with the growth of these campuses was previously capped due to a fear that the schools were not being held accountable.

Last year the Legislature passed significant reform that requires these schools to maintain high standards of excellence in the courses they offer. This reform has been successful so far in weeding out courses that no longer qualify.

Now the cap is being lifted because the reform legislation has alleviated many officials' concerns. So that means additional funding for expansions of the JTED system.

But as the legislature provides with one hand, it takes with the other by cutting funding for equipment and supplies.

EVIT is among 11 schools in Arizona that currently offer specialized technical education in the JTED system. Students at these schools should not suffer because of the popularity and growth of their programs and programs like theirs. In other words, we should not pay for the expansion of a successful educational system by punishing the students already in it.

There is time left in the budget process. Legislators still have a chance to make up for a mistake. We commonly preach improved education and investment in innovation in our state. It's time to make sure that our taxpayer dollars are spent in a way that is promised again and again on many campaign trails.
 

[Return to top]

DUI amendments would address growing problem

Published in The Arizona Republic April 25, 2007

On an early evening in March of 1996, I was driving home with a friend in the passenger seat. We stopped at an intersection behind another vehicle at a red light. The light turned green and traffic started to move. The vehicle in front of us passed through the intersection and I followed. As I entered the intersection, I heard the screech of tires to my left. I turned only to see an ocean of shattered glass flying toward my face.

A man had been drinking earlier in the evening, and despite having three previous DUIs, he made the decision to drive drunk again. He was traveling toward a green light at the intersection, and when the light turned red, he thought he could make it through. He was wrong.

His vehicle impacted mine on the driver's side traveling at approximately 55 miles per hour. My passenger and I were both lucky enough to survive. Unfortunately, many Arizonans are not. In 2005, 492 Arizonans died in alcohol-related traffic incidents. That was 42 percent of all traffic fatalities that year in this state, according to Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

The man who hit my friend and me spent 90 days in tent city for nearly killing us. But his temporary loss of freedom was nothing compared to the effect he had on my life.

For that offender and others who violate our laws and endanger the lives of Arizonans by driving under the influence of alcohol, I have a gift. My gift comes in the form of another chance to do the right thing. With the passage of SB1029, we will grant them another chance while, at the same time, making sure Arizonans are protected while they are on the road.

Representative Ed Ableser and I have offered, in the form of two amendments, the chance for DUI offenders to rehabilitate their lives.

First, Ableser's amendment would mandate treatment programs for offenders who are arrested while driving at extreme intoxication levels. These offenders most often have alcohol problems in addition to their decision to drive after drinking heavily. These treatment programs would hopefully help address those issues, which might actually help them to not be repeat offenders.

My amendment mandates that ignition interlock devices be installed in every DUI offender's vehicle in order to prevent them from drunken driving for at least one year after their driving rights are restored. This puts an objective standard between the driver and the driver's ability to operate the vehicle. For many, this serves as a learning tool, both to deter them from repeat offenses and to teach them to not get in the car when they are drunk.

We offer these amendments, not simply as punitive measures, but as ways to address a growing problem in Arizona that requires alternative solutions. Nothing that has been done legislatively to this point has done much to stem the tide of drunken driving in Arizona. These "outside the box" amendments are steps in the right direction.

I hope that my colleagues will join us in working to make these amendments law, not for me, but for the more than 5,000 Arizonans who have lost their lives in alcohol-related fatalities since the crash that nearly took my life in 1996.
 

[Return to top]

Legislative leaders try to stifle opposing views
Published in The Arizona Republic April 6, 2007

When people elect their leaders, most look for strength and enthusiasm.

Voters want someone to stand up and fight hard for us. We expect our leaders to have a good understanding of the issues and strong intellects, but those factors are often trumped by whether someone is a passionate voice for our concerns.

Passion is a litmus test. If a candidate goes out on the campaign trail and rambles about the idiosyncrasies of state statutes or the minutia of budgetary issues, most voters do not respond.

We want leaders that know how to communicate their platform in an appealing way because we assume that they'll fight for our issues with the same zeal once they are elected.

We elect these types of leaders, the charismatic and well-spoken communicators, but passion is not rewarded at the Legislature. When members of the Legislature stand up to voice their concerns and the concerns of their constituents, they are commonly chastised and told to hold their tongues.

Some legislators were recently pushing a bill to remove the cap on what the state can charge schoolteachers to take mandatory proficiency exams. The state already circumvents this law by having private testing companies charge teachers directly up to $220 per test.

The bill's purpose was to codify the exploitation of this loophole and to completely remove any possible limitation of what we can charge teachers who in many cases are forced to take a test just to keep their job.

I stood on the floor of the Arizona House of Representatives to express my dislike of the idea of charging our already underpaid teachers such excessive fees. In explanation of my opposition I referred to the bill as a "terrible bill."

I was interrupted and reprimanded by the chairman for my statement. The Speaker Pro-Tempore, Rep. Bob Robson, R-Chandler, then explained that I should not attack the motives of other members of the Legislature.

House rules prohibit members of the Legislature from "impugning" each other. This essentially means that we can't direct negative comments toward any other member in speeches on the floor. There is no rule against saying anything about a bill.

It was clearly not my intent to attack the motives of the bill's sponsor nor was that the perception of most of the other legislators present. In fact, the sponsor even apologized to me on behalf of Robson, whom he thought to be clearly in the wrong. He evidently did not feel "impugned."

Scenarios like this are not an uncommon occurrence at the state Capitol. Legislators commonly express their passion on a particular issue and are suppressed by the majority party's leadership.

My fellow representative from District 17, Ed Ableser, is commonly a victim of such censorship. He is known for being very outspoken on important issues like mental health, higher education and criminal law.

When he speaks out on these issues at the Legislature, he is often stymied or cut short by other legislators.

It is a disgrace that elected representatives are censored in such a way when they are simply doing the job of expressing the views of those who elected them. It is also a disservice to our constituents.

The people of Arizona voted for change last November. We voted for a new direction in the Legislature. We voted to have a Legislature that would hear the voice of the people, but there are still elements at the Capitol that don't want our voices heard.

I will continue to fight for issues important to me and to the people of Tempe and south Scottsdale.

If leadership continues to try to stop me and other elected representatives from expressing our views, well I think that is just terrible.

[Return to top]

State has obligation to retain best teachers

Published in The Arizona Republic March 17, 2007

Prior to being sworn in to the Arizona Legislature at the start of this year, I developed a plan. I would focus my energy on a few bills that would address issues of major concern to my constituents and me.

I concentrated my efforts on education, health care quality and public safety. I wrote a bill to improve the quality of cancer screening coverage in this state and another to stiffen penalties for DUI. I also drafted bills to address major K-12 education issues such as class size, teacher salaries and teacher shortage.

My teacher shortage bill has made it furthest through the legislative process. It was heard in both the Higher Education and the Appropriations committees and passed both overwhelmingly. The bill awaits a hearing in the Rules committee, for the purpose of determining constitutionality. Most bills that contain an appropriation of funds are held up at that level until we make it further into the budget negotiation process.

I am excited at the prospect of getting a bill through in my first session at the Legislature. I realize that it still may not make it, but I am encouraged that it is as far along in the process as any bill of its kind could be.

The teacher shortage bill is designed to help alleviate shortage issues in districts that have identifiable problems attracting teachers across the curriculum and to fill positions across the state in math, science and special education.

Arizona has more than 1,300 emergency-certified teachers in classrooms across the state this year, according to the Department of Education. That means teachers without proficiencies in their subjects who may not have ever taken an education class are in many of those classrooms today. These teachers only fill vacant positions that principals are unable to fill at a cutoff point just a few weeks before the start of the school year. I think most would prefer to have any teacher in a classroom rather than none, but this exemplifies a real shortage issue in our state.

We have a problem and need a solution. My legislation, House Bill 2206, takes a step in the right direction. Any incoming education students or those who are currently enrolled in any of our state's higher education institutions (public universities, community colleges or private institutions) would be eligible to apply for a loan that covers their tuition and fees each year under this bill. When they graduate, they would teach in a shortage district or in any math, science or special education position in the state. Each year they teach in one of these positions, a year of their loans would be forgiven.

HB 2206 says to Arizona's potential teachers: Stay here and fill a great need, and we will pay for your college education. We already have similar programs for medical professionals, for whom we also have a great need in our state.

Teachers are no different. Our society needs doctors and nurses to survive physically, but we also need teachers in order to allow our society to continue to flourish. We must continue to enrich our minds and the minds of our children if we are to be the great society that so many of us have imagined.

I have committed as the defining principle of my work at the Legislature to make Arizona one of the greatest states in our nation. If we continue to lose the best and brightest minds to other states and other professions, we will have failed. To be the greatest state in the greatest nation, we must focus our energy on education.
 

[Return to top]

It's not always the legislature's role to solve a problem
Published in The Arizona Republic March 2, 2007

The inner workings of the Arizona State Legislature are a mystery to most Arizonans. Sometimes the important issues go uncovered by the news media. Many of the positive accomplishments that take place at the state capitol go unnoticed to observers.

It's a little like making sausage. You don't necessarily want to see how some things are done, but there is a lot that we are missing. I hope to use this weekly column as an outlet to provide the Republic's readers with some insight from a unique perspective.

As the legislature's youngest member and a freshman, I'll offer a layman's view of the lawmaking process. I'll also provide information and updates on the status of legislation important to the people of Tempe and South Scottsdale.

Each legislative session has its own culture and unique issues. An issue at the forefront this session is that of the new minimum wage law and its impact on the developmentally disabled community. The controversy surrounding this issue focuses on the inability of employers of the developmentally disabled, also known as service providers, to pay $6.75/hour to their disabled employees in compliance with Arizona's new minimum wage law (Proposition 202).

The federal minimum wage law, which Arizona used until the passage of Proposition 202, has an exception for people classified as developmentally disabled. In the past, service providers used this exception to hire individuals with severe disabilities so they could get job experience and training in positions that fit their skill level and ability.

I recently visited two centers that provide these types of services, TCH in Tempe and STARS in South Scottsdale. It's clear that these centers offer employment and training opportunities that are quite fulfilling for many of these individuals who would not be given such chances in the mainstream job market.

With the recent passage of Arizona's Proposition 202, which does not include the same exception, many providers are unable to pay the new minimum wage that is in many cases ten times the previous wage of disabled employees. Many of the providers and families fear that the new law will force the closure of many or most of these facilities.

Many members of the legislature are pushing a bill to include such an exception in the new Arizona minimum wage law. Others argue that the voter's intent in passing the law was that all Arizonans would make at least the minimum wage, including the disabled. Interestingly, it may not matter who is right or which argument prevails.

Arizona has a Voter Protection Act, which dictates that the legislature cannot alter a law passed by voters unless it "furthers the purposes." Not to mention that it would require a three-fourth's vote in both chambers. It doesn't seem likely that a judge is going to buy the argument that any exception to a law furthers its intent.

So here we are positioned directly between a rock and a hard place. Some believe the only recourse is to wait two years for an exception to be put to the voters, while countless disabled workers lose their jobs and providers go out of business.

I come from a different school of thought. Members of the disabled community, disability advocates and service providers are already at the negotiation table. There has to be a means to allow this important industry to function in a way that offers continued opportunity for disabled employees and economic solvency with protection from liability for providers. If a compromise can be made without further governmental interference, there may be a light at the end of the tunnel.

This important issue is a great example that it is not always the role of the legislature to pass a law to address a problem. Sometimes it's our job to serve as leaders and offer advice, and let the people directly involved come to a compromise to solve the problem.
 

[Return to top]

Voters helped new legislator make agenda

Published in The Arizona Republic November 18, 2006

I am so proud that the people of our community have picked Ed Ableser and me to represent them in the State House of Representatives. I would like to thank the voters for putting their confidence in us.
 

We had a great deal of help from friends, family and supporters this year. I would like to extend my heartfelt gratitude for all of your tireless efforts.

I have worked hard over the last eight months to reach out to people across our community. Through those efforts, I have developed a good understanding of the issues important to our neighbors. After personally knocking on over 7,000 doors and talking to District 17 voters of different backgrounds and ideologies, I have molded the priorities of our community into a legislative agenda.

I have plans to introduce a teacher’s minimum wage and reduce class sizes for K-20. I will work to pass a mandate that health insurance companies in our state cover doctor-recommended cancer screenings. I will be an advocate for tough sanctions on employers who knowingly break the law to hire illegal immigrants and law enforcement efforts to catch human smugglers and identity thieves.

In the coming weeks and months, I will also fight to keep tuition low at our state’s universities. Just two weeks from now, the Arizona Board of Regents will vote on the recommended tuition increases, without giving the new legislature a chance to appropriate higher education funding. I will communicate my hopes to the Regents to put off any drastic increases until the new Legislature has a chance to address the state’s contributions. After the impending vote, I will continue to work with the Regents and our university leadership to prevent major increases in the future. Most importantly, I will work to ensure that our legislature does its part to uphold our constitutional responsibility to keep tuition low.

I am proud to have called Arizona my home for my entire life. Having the ability to make positive changes for the future of our state is an honor, and I will work diligently to represent the people of Tempe and South Scottsdale to the best of my ability.

[Return to top]

Not enough for schools

Published in The Arizona Republic July 12, 2006

I'm disappointed in our Arizona Legislature and the passing of next year's budget. Once again, lawmakers are providing lip service, rather than budget dollars, for improving education in our state.

They widely tout the increases for teacher salaries and all-day kindergarten. While they've taken small steps in the right direction, it's not enough - especially when you consider what the state will be giving away to big corporations in the form of tax credits for private schools.

I have no doubt that the Legislature will end up paying for those tax credits out of funds for public education. Arizona teachers still will be among the lowest paid in the country, schools and classrooms still will be overcrowded, and state education dollars still will be unevenly distributed.

I challenge people to ask legislative candidates out on the campaign trail this year if they believe that we pay teachers enough to attract and retain the good ones. Ask them if they send their children to a school where 36 students sit in classes with 35 desks.

Legislators and candidates in this state have talked long enough about making real improvements in education. It's time to write them in the books of law.

[Return to top]

Robin Hood in reverse for Arizona students

Published in The Arizona Republic Mar. 17, 2006

This week the Legislature will send another bill to Governor Napolitano’s desk demanding corporate tax credits for private school donors. Backers claim that the bill means more school choice opportunities, but at what cost?

Once again the Republican-led Legislature will attempt to fund this program by sapping money directly from already underfunded public schools. Robbing money from ailing schools to pay for corporate tax credits sounds a lot like Robin Hood in reverse.

Proponents for bills of this type also argue that funds should follow kids who leave public school to attend private school. They already do. Schools in Arizona are funded based on enrolment, so when a student leaves a school, so does the money. Loads of this money already shifts to private schools through existing laws that allow friends and relatives of a student to receive dollar-for-dollar state tax credits for private school tuition donations. So passage of the current proposal would move far more money than that allocated for students who opt to leave public schools.

It’s time for the Legislature to stop playing politics with our children’s educations. Once again the Governor will be forced to use her veto to protect the future of our state.

[Return to top]

Outlook for state’s kids gets grimmer

Published in The Arizona Republic Dec. 10, 2004

I read in yesterday’s Republic that Arizona leads the nation in yet another dubious category when it comes to children’s issues. A new study reports that we have a higher percentage of children living in foster-care group homes than any other state in the country.

As the new legislature is gaveled into session this January, some members need to convince the people who elected them that they value children at least as much as they value tax credits. Fully funding Arizona’s Permanent Guardianship program would be a great start. This program provides financial support to extended family members who elect to take on parental rights of children who cannot remain with their birth parents for whatever reason. This option is not federally subsidized in the way that foster care or adoption is.

Studies prove that the stability of care that can be offered by loving family members in permanent guardianship situations is not only beneficial to the child, but actually ends up saving the government money in the long run. So when it seems funds may run short this year, make sure to tell your legislators to make protecting Arizona’s children their New Years resolution.

[Return to top]