Thursday, June 4th, 2009...8:41 pm
House Passes Bad Budget…But…
Jump to Comments
The State House passed the budget tonight, but did so without the votes of Doug Quelland, Bill Konopnicki, Vic Williams and the entire Democratic caucus. To be fair, there were also a smattering of Republicans that voted against pieces of the budget here and there.
But, here is the funny part:
In explaining his vote, former Speaker Jim Weiers said that he originally was going to vote against the budget, but got assurances from Tlatoani Kirk Adams and Marszałek Senatu Bob Burns that the budget would not be transmitted to the governor.
Eh? If that’s true, what exactly was the point of this whole exercise?
13 Comments
June 4th, 2009 at 9:09 pm
Kudos to Williams. I would like to see the explanation for his vote, but I am very proud of him for taking a stand against his party on this one. I can only hope it is because he sits on House education and has learned a bit about what our schools and universities are facing.
Last, Quelland and Konopnicki…I want to see the reasoning, but well done again as I have seem similar votes from both of you in the past.
June 4th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
The point? So that Bob Burns can keep his promise of not hearing any bills in the Senate until a budget is passed. It doesn’t matter that the budget passed is DOA, now they can hear the bills that lobbyists are demanding and Burns can say he kept his word.
June 4th, 2009 at 10:34 pm
How is it that they can claim the bill will not be transmitted to the Governor? The AZ Constitution says “Every measure when finally passed shall be presented to the governor for his approval or disapproval” – I am just wondering how this will work?
June 4th, 2009 at 11:45 pm
250 bills, waiting in the wings, from what I hear, Zelph.
June 5th, 2009 at 8:31 am
Vic Williams….nice work, impressive, and I give credit where credit is due. Antenori? Rather disappointed, man, I figured you a shoo in to nail these guys.
June 5th, 2009 at 9:08 am
I’m sorry but did Williams vote “No” or “NV?” Last vote I saw at the end of the evening had a “NV” next to Williams’ name. I’ll give credit where credit is due but a “NV” doesn’t seem as ballsy as a flat out “No.” BUT it takes a pair. For sure.
June 5th, 2009 at 10:57 am
Maybe I’m just a little cynical but could they have ulterior motives to their “No” votes. And when I say ulterior I mean this is more of a political calculation.
r?
June 5th, 2009 at 11:06 am
You are all a little naive aren’t you? Williams is able to vote no because he is told the numbers are in the bag. Now he can go back to his district and say he represented them when he didn’t have to. Please don’t fall for it.
June 5th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Kudos to Mantra. Anyone who has been following Williams and his voting record since he was sworn in knows full well that Vic has not been voting in the interests of his district all along. His earlier votes on the floor or in committee have flown in the face of the needs of LD26, not to mention his own rhetoric when he ran for office.
June 5th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
Im not falling for anything Mantra and Rex. I know it is a political calculation on his part…or maybe it is sincerity, but his vote went the right direction and praise, regardless, needs to be given. It also tells me that he is listening and hearing a lot of angry people (GOP, Dems, and Indeps) who are sick of it.
If you are right and it is a cold, hard calculation then he is smart…and scared.
June 5th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
This happens much more than you may think kralmajales because their is nothing cold and hard about it. Here is one recent story of how we went so far right.
Sen. Barbara Leff swore up and down to her constituents that she would hold out for a fix in the “excess utilities” in 2007. The budget comes to the Senate, it has the language, and despite her saying out loud and to our faces, she voted no. She was later heard in the elevator bragging how she got everything she wanted and didn’t have to vote yes. It passed by one vote in each chamber. Then in 2008, some yes votes from the Repugnuts were targeted by their far right in the primary. We lost the one guy from Tuscon and the other from Sedona and here we are…SOL
June 5th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
Man do I appreciate what you are saying Mantra. Again, if you are right, and he is not a moderate, then he is clearly exhibiting behavior of one who is running scared. The best way to expose this is to see how he is treated on conservative blogs…as a RINO…then there is the rock and the hard place.
Last, if there is any reason above any to vote for someone else than Vic, it is that it is one more seat toward control of the house and organization of the body (and its committees). Moderate or not, his persona in the House allows the Chamber to exist and protect the interests of the hard right.
Still…I had to say thank you to him. Even if I am being a bit backhanded now about it. Some one has to stand up and someone has to reach across the ailse to get anything done here.
Which is why those at the U. are literally praying for Gov. Brewer’s budget…as bad as it is, it is a breath of fresh air in comparison to those of the House and Senate.
June 8th, 2009 at 12:15 am
I suspect Slick Vic was a NV because of two conflicting reasons:
1. The bill contains government spending, therefore a NO vote must be cast
2. He cannot upset his Republican Maricopa overlords, therefore he must vote yes.
Easiest way out: No Vote