Guide to Local, State and Federal Politics
Biography for Jon Katz
Jon Katz is host of Media Rant, sparking lively debates about the issues that emerge as old and new media approach the millennium. As a media gadfly and catalyst in this no-holds-barred interactive discussion space, Katz posts new topics daily, and engages in spirited debates with fellow netizens. Katz is a former media critic for New York magazine and Rolling Stone, and acontributing editor at Wired magazine. He is also the author of a novel and fourmysteries.
Biography for Phoenix Mayor Skip Rimsza
Skip Rimsza was elected Mayor of Phoenix on October 25, 1994 with 57 percent of the vote, and re-elected to a four-year term on October 4, 1995 capturing 60 percent of the vote in a five-way race. He is the 50th person to serve as Mayor of Phoenix.
At age 42, Rimsza is one of the youngest mayors in Phoenix history. Prior to becoming Mayor, he served on the Phoenix City Council, representing District 3, from 1990 to 1994 and was Vice Mayor in 1993.
Born in Chicago, Rimsza moved - with his parents - to Phoenix at an early age and is raising his own family here: Brian, born in 1981, Jenny born in 1982, and the most recent addition to the Rimsza family, triplets Alexander, Taylor and Nicole, born on June 6, 1996. He serves on several community boards and is a former President of the Board of Realtors. Rimsza is married to Kim Gill-Rimsza who operates her own successful business, the Gill Group.
Mayor Rimsza believes that there are three goals that Phoenix must meet in order to secure its future:
- To renew our neighborhoods
- To expand our economy
- To protect our families
He has been working hard on an in-fill housing plan and has led a successful fight against the blight of graffiti.
Mayor Rimsza's current challenge is improving our educational system - a task usually reserved for county and state officials. "The state of our children IS the state of our city," the Mayor commented in a State of the City address. We have to act because the state simply lacks the passion to improve our educational system."
In his earlier days, Mayor Rimsza and his brother were hunting guides in Alaska. He continues to return to Alaska, usually accompanied by his oldest son. In his spare time, the Mayor likes to restore old cars and trucks (he drives a '56 Ford pickup) and make stained glass.
City Government 101
by Mayor Skip Rimsza
There are seemingly so many levels of government that it makes it difficult for most people to figure out who is responsible for what. When people are frustrated with government, it seems they are frustrated with all government. But I would make the case that city - or municipal government - is far different from the other public-sector entities.
Unlike state government (and most certainly unlike the federal government) city officials don't sit around debating lofty philosophical issues on a mostly partisan basis. While the United States Congress debates special prosecutors, campaign finance reform and who should be our ambassador to Mexico - the City of Phoenix picks up your garbage twice a week, for about 11 bucks a month, and we supply the containers.
The best way to describe what city government does is simple: We provide the basic services that, if you weren't buying them from us, you would buy them someplace else. If we didn't provide fire protection, you would subscribe to a fire-fighting services. If we didn't provide police protection, you would subscribe to a private security service. If we didn't pipe water into your home, you would purchase water elsewhere. And if we didn't pick up your garbage, you would hire someone else to haul it away.
Go down the list of city services and you'll find out for yourself that city government really does provide services. And city government is nothing more than customer service.
Let me give you just one example of how, as elected city officials, our positions would be driven by the customer, not by ideology. Someone once asked me how I felt about bus drivers carrying guns. And that's an easy one. I used to guide in Alaska. I own several weapons. I often go hunting with my son Brian. I cherish the Second Amendment (and all the others). I belonged to the NRA for most of my 42 years.
And none of that should enter the equation.
The only thing that matters is this: What do our customers want? We have buses out there that we want our customers to ride. What decision should we make to benefit our customers? The bus riders (and potential riders) I talk to would feel a whole lot better about their safety if the person next to them was not carrying a gun.
So that should be the city's position. No lofty philosophical discussions. No checking of the party platform. Just customer service.
Lastly, the city differs from other levels of government in that it is run on a non-partisan basis. We don't run as Republicans, Democrats, Independents or Libertarians. We run as Phoenicians. Why? Because when it comes right down to it, there isn't a Republican way and a Democratic way to fill a pothole. There's just a right way, a professional way.
And we've got it down pretty good.
Biography for P. Robert Fannin
Senior Partner - Quarles & Brady
Mr. P. Robert "Bob" Fannin is a senior partner in the Arizona office of the national law firm of Quarles & Brady. A native of Phoenix, Mr. Fannin graduated with a B.A. degree in economics from Stanford University in 1957, served in the United States Air Force as a commissioned officer for three years and received a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Arizona College of Law in 1963. He has been a lawyer and lobbyist in private practice since his graduation from law school.
Mr. Fannin has been very active in Bar and civic affairs in Arizona. He was President of the Junior Bar Section of the State Bar of Arizona and has participated as a speaker and moderator in continuing legal education programs relating to government relations for the past five years. He was Chairman of the 1976 Phoenix Open Golf Tournament, Big Chief of the Phoenix Thunderbirds (Special Events Committee of the Phoenix Chamber of Commerce), member of the City of Phoenix Environmental Commission, member of the Commission on Salaries of Elected Officials (appointed by the Supreme Court of Arizona), and has served on a variety of other governmental advisory committees. His present civic activities include Director of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce, Director of the Arizona State University Law College Association, member of the Board of the Barrow Neurological Institute Foundation, and immediate past Chairman and member of the Governor's Film and Television Advisory Board. He serves on the committees of many political candidates.
Mr. Fannin's wife, Lisa, is a neuroanesthesiologist who practices at Barrow Neurological Institute in Phoenix. There are three Fannin children: Paul Jr., Sheryl, and Joe.
Lobbying the Arizona Legislature from a Lobbyist's Perspective
by P. Robert Fannin, Wendy G. Briggs and Jeffrey A. Sandquist
The Legislature meets in regular session for 100 days each year for the consideration of over one thousand bills, which makes it necessary for businesses, environmentalists, and others to have someone watch out for their interests. If a person or business does not have time nor the expertise necessary, they can hire a lobbyist.
What is this thing called a lobbyist? A lobbyist is one who acts on behalf of another person or business for the purpose of influencing governmental legislation and rules. A person must be registered as a lobbyist with the Secretary of State to act for another in this regard.
To give one an idea as to how important it is to have the expertise and experience in dealing with the Legislature, we provide the following example of lobbying for the enactment of a bill:
Let's say an association of advertising companies decides to seek passage of a state law that would prevent any municipality from enacting an ordinance that would restrict the way alcohol products are advertised. Initially, the association lobbyist would need to prepare a draft of the legislation and find a legislator or group of legislators to sponsor the bill. It is helpful to find a sponsor who has some interest in the legislative issue. In this case, legislators that are protective of First Amendment rights would be helpful. Legislators serving on the legislative committee most likely to have the bill assigned to it are the best sponsors. Other potential sponsors would be any legislators who understand the advertising industry.
Once a sponsor is secured, the lobbyist asks the sponsor to ask the Legislature's bill drafters, the Legislative Council, to draft the bill. Many times the lobbyist provides the sponsor with language and works closely with the Council. After the bill draft is finalized, an introduction set is provided to the bill sponsor. The sponsor then obtains additional sponsors who signify their sponsorship of the bill by signing the "intro set." The lobbyist can be helpful by providing the primary sponsor with a list of legislators he or she has talked to and who have agreed to co-sponsor the bill. If the legislation is extremely controversial, it will be beneficial to have as many sponsor as possible, including as many people on the committee to which the bill is likely to be assigned, as well as people in leadership positions in both the Senate and the House.
After the introduction set has been signed by all potential sponsors, the sponsor files the bill, or "drops the bill in the hopper," with the Secretary of the Senate or the Clerk of the House, depending on whether it is a House or Senate bill. The sponsor can pick either as long as there is a sponsor from that body. Let's assume this bill is a Senate bill and it is filed with the Secretary of the Senate.
The next step requiring some strategy is the assignment of the bill to a standing committee. All bills that are introduced are assigned to at least one standing committee and the Rules Committee. The standing committee holds a substantive hearing on the legislation. The Rules Committee merely determines whether the bill is constitutional and in the proper form. Obviously, it is vitally important that the bill be assigned to the committee that will most likely pass it. Accordingly, it is important to talk to legislators and staff to request that the bill be assigned to the desired committee.
Once the bill has been assigned, it is important to continue to lobby each member of that committee and to ask the Chairperson to schedule the bill for a hearing. Each bill must receive a simple majority of the votes of the committee members present at this hearing. Once important observation here is that when a lobbyist is talking to legislators and staff, it is very important to provide them with the arguments for and against the bill. When legislators do not feel a lobbyist has given them both sides of the story, they feel misled. Reputation and integrity are everything in lobbying. In order to be effective and well respected, a lobbyist must provide legislators and staff with a balanced view of all bills on which they lobby.
It is also important to discuss your legislation with the staff member assigned to that committee. The committee analyst is in charge of preparing summaries of all legislation and is responsible for explaining bills in committee hearings and caucus. Thus, it is important that the staff understands the legislation and its background and that the summary is accurate.
At the hearing on the legislation, the staff first presents an oral summary of the legislation. After the summary, the committee chair will call members of the public, lobbyists, etc., who have signed up to speak at the hearing. There is a lot of strategy that goes on in committee hearings that is too lengthy to detail here. Suffice it to say that lobbyists should be clear and concise in their testimony, should advocate strongly for their client's position, and should acknowledge and appropriately respond to the opposition's arguments. After all testimony has concluded on the bill, the committee will vote on the legislation.
All bills passed out of a committee immediately go to the Rules Committee to determined whether it is constitutional and in proper form. Testimony is not normally taken in this committee and bills are not individually discussed unless there is a constitutional problem.
Assuming the legislation is approved by the Rules Committee, it will then be scheduled for caucus. Caucus meetings are held separately by the majority and minority parties and are used to make all legislators aware of the bills which have cleared committee. During caucus, staff members review each bill and caucus members have the opportunity to ask staff and other members questions about the bills. Caucus is an excellent opportunity for a lobbyist to determine whether legislators have concerns with their legislation. A bill must be cleared by the majority caucus.
Once a bill has cleared the majority caucus, it is scheduled to be heard in Committee of the Whole - "COW" - by the Senate President or Speaker of the House. The Committee of the Whole is the time at which the full body debates the legislation on the floor of that body. These debates are open to the public and are a good opportunity to determine what legislators support or oppose the legislation and for what reasons. It is important during the caucus and COW process to be lobbying all members to secure enough votes for the legislation. If a particular legislator is not receptive, it is helpful to have a constituent talk to the legislator. Using our example, the lobbyist should try to get an advertising company employee who lives in that legislator's district to call the legislator and explain to him or her the importance of the legislation.
After COW completes its debate and votes to approve the bill, the bill is placed on a Third Reading Calendar. The Third Reading Calendar is essentially the final vote of the bill in that particular chamber (Senate or House). A bill normally needs a majority of the members of the body to pass. Once a bill has passed, it is reintroduced in the opposite chamber and the process begins again. Using our example, it would have passed the Senate and be introduced in the House.
If the legislation is amended in any way when it goes through the House, it must return to the Senate for approval or disapproval of these amendments. If the amendments are approved by the Senate sponsor of the legislation, the bill goes to a final vote in the Senate and then to the Governor for his or her signature. However, using our example, if the Senate sponsor did not approve of the amendments made to the bill in the House, a conference committee would be appointed to work on a compromise amendment. A conference committee consists of members of both the House and the Senate and usually meets one time to approve a final piece of legislation. After the bill emerges from conference committee, and the conference committee report is signed, the bill must return to each chamber for a final vote and then is transmitted to the Governor for signature. It is very important that the sponsor keep in close contact with the Governor's office throughout the process to make sure that the Governor does not have a problem with the bill that would result in a veto.
Hopefully, this article gives one idea of how important it is to know the process and to have trusting relationships with those who consider legislation.
For another, and more comprehensive treatise on the Legislature, see:
"From Idea...to Bill...to Law" by Arizona State Senator Randall Gnant
Biography for John Kaites
Former State Senator and Candidate for Attorney General
John Kaites, former Republican State Senator from District 16, first ran for the Arizona Legislature in 1992. He is a former Assistant Attorney General for the State of Arizona and a former Deputy Maricopa County Attorney.
Prior to running for the Legislature, Kaites prosecuted cases in both the organized crime and racketeering division of the Attorney's General office as well as criminal cases from some of the toughest parts of Phoenix for the Maricopa County Attorney's office. He ran for the legislature out of frustration with the criminal justice system that allowed criminals, who were sentenced to prison, to be released many years earlier than the full term of their sentence.
As a freshman member of the Arizona House of Representatives, he was appointed as Vice-Chairman of the Judiciary Committee and in his first 100 days as a State Representative, he helped re-write the entire criminal code for the State of Arizona to ensure that criminals, who were convicted and sentenced to serve ten years in prison, actually served the full ten years. After serving one term in the Arizona House of Representatives, he ran for the Arizona State Senate and was successfully elected with 69 percent of the vote.
As a freshman member of the Arizona State Senate, he was appointed Chairman of the Senate Banking and Insurance Committee. He also served as a member of the Rules Committee, Appropriations Committee and Finance Committee.
During his first two years in the Senate, he drafted products liability legislation and other civil justice reform measures, and successfully moved them through the legislative process. He was instrumental in making changes to the criminal code relating to the treatment of sexual predators in Arizona. He helped implement community notification for sexual predators, and he embarked on a mission to change the juvenile justice system. He was re-elected to the Arizona State Senate in 1996 with 70 percent of the vote and was appointed as Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
During his second term in the Senate, he introduced and successfully passed legislation changing Arizona's juvenile justice system from top to bottom, ensuring that the most dangerous, violent and chronic offenders are moved out of the juvenile justice system and into the adult court system to face adult sanctions, thus allowing Arizona to spend its valuable rehabilitative dollars on the vast majority of juveniles whose lives can be turned around.
Kaites' legislation has been recognized nationally and as such, was asked to testify before the United States Senate on juvenile justice legislation currently making its way through Congress. He accomplished is goal of changing Arizona's criminal justice system from top to bottom in only five years in the Arizona Legislature.
Additionally, during his legislative tenure, he helped reduce Arizona's personal income tax rate by 28 percent and participated in many substantive education reforms within Arizona. He was closely involved with legislation that made Arizona's regulatory system fairer and more efficient in addition to working on innovative welfare reform legislation.
Kaites recently lost a 1998 primary election bid in what many consider to be one of the most contentious and controversial races for the State Attorney General post.