♪?

TED: COMING UP NEXT ON "ARIZONA HORIZON," IT'S THE JOURNALISTS' ROUNDTABLE.

WE'LL LOOK AT THE WEEK'S TOP STORIES INCLUDING THE STATE SENATE PASSING A BUDGET AND ADJOURNING FOR THE YEAR DESPITE NO VOTE ON THE BUDGET AS YET BY THE HOUSE.

JOURNALISTS' ROUNDTABLE IS NEXT ON "ARIZONA HORIZON."

TED: GOOD EVENING, AND WELCOME TO "ARIZONA HORIZON."

I'M TED SIMONS.

IT'S FRIDAY AND TIME FOR THE JOURNALISTS' ROUNDTABLE.

JOINING US TONIGHT, MARY JO PITZL OF "ARIZONA REPUBLIC" AND AZCENTRAL.COM.

CAMRYN SANCHEZ OF KJZZ RADIO AND LAURIE ROBERTS OF ARIZONA CENTRAL.

MARY JO, START WITH YOU, SENATE APPROVES A PLAN AND ADJOURNS BUT THE HOUSE IS SUPPOSED TO COME BACK MONDAY.

WHAT'S GOING ON?

>> WELL, THE SENATE SAYS THEY HAVE ADJOURNED SINE DIE, WHICH MEANS THEY'RE GONE, FOR THE REST OF THE SESSION, THAT IS DISPUTABLE BECAUSE THE HOUSE, THERE'S TECHNICALITY BUT THE HOUSE HAS TO BE IN SESSION TO BE RECOGNIZED AND THEY WEREN'T.

BUT THE SENATE SAYS OUR WORK'S DONE HERE.

WE'RE OFF.

WHILE THEY WERE STILL IN THE PROCESS OF VOTING BUDGET BILLS, IN THE EARLY EVENING, WHAT DAY IS THIS?

ON THURSDAY, THE SENATE ANNOUNCED, WE'RE GOING TO GO HOME.

THE PLAN FOR THE HOUSE WAS TO JUST KEEP WORKING THROUGH THE WEEKEND INTO SATURDAY, GET THE BUDGET FOR THE SENATE.

PUT IT THROUGH THEIR PROCESS AND BE DONE EARLY SATURDAY MORNING, AND THURSDAY EVENING, THEY CHANGED THEIR MIND AND SAID WE'RE GOING HOME.

SEE YOU MONDAY.

>> WHAT'S GOING ON HERE, CAMRYN, WHAT'S THE DEAL?

>> THERE'S POLITICS.

A STATEMENT THE HOUSE IS MAKING.

THEY'RE UPSET WITH THE BUDGET.

YOU KNOW, THERE HAVE BEEN SIGNS OF THIS SOMEWHAT EARLIER ON.

THERE WAS NAME CALLING ON SOCIAL MEDIA.

LIVINGSTON, THE HEAD OF BASICALLY THE HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS NEGOTIATIONS HAD CALLED THE SENATE PRESIDENT A RHINO, A REPUBLICAN IN NAME ONLY.

>> LIKE WARREN PETERSEN.

>> SENATOR HOFFMAN, WORKING TO STOP THE BUDGET, WHICH HE CALLED A DEMOCRAT BUDGET.

IT'S WEIRD JUST FROM THE GET-GO THAT THE SENATE NEGOTIATED THE BUDGET WITH THE GOVERNOR, RATHER THAN THE HOUSE AND SENATE WORKING AS ONE TEAM AND THEN GOING TO THE GOVERNOR.

THAT IS UNUSUAL.

>> IN WHAT WORLD IS WARREN PETERSEN A RINO?

>> HE'S NOT.

WARREN PETERSEN IS LIVING IN THE REAL WORLD.

IF YOU WANT TO GET A BUDGET WITHOUT DOING THE GOVERNOR'S VETO DANCE, YOU GOT TO WORK WITH THE GOVERNOR.

YOU'VE GOT TO GIVE AND TAKE ON BOTH SIDES AND BE THE ADULTS IN THE ROOM AND NEGOTIATE SOMETHING.

THE HOUSE IS MORE DOMINATED BY PROBABLY MORE CONSERVATIVE LEGISLATORS, AND THE ARIZONA FREEDOM CAUCUS, THEY CONSIDER HER ABOVE.

THEY ARE NOT GOING TO DEAL WITH THE GOVERNOR IF THEY DON'T HAVE TO.

THEY WENT INTO A FANTASY LAND BUBBLE AND SAID WE'LL MAKE OUR OWN BUDGET.

IT'S NOT GOING TO GO UP TO THE GOVERNOR, IF IT WERE TO GO UP TO THE GOVERNOR, IT WOULD COME RIGHT DOWN WITH A VETO.

THEY ARE TRYING TO GET OUT OF THERE.

TEN DAYS UNTIL A GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN.

>> WHAT HAPPENS ON MONDAY?

WHAT HAPPENS THAT THE HOUSE LOOKS AT THE BUDGET AND SAYS WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE A COUPLE THINGS HERE?

>> WELL, I GUESS THEY CAN TRY TO DO THAT, AND TO GIVE THEM SOME GRACE, MAYBE DEPENDING ON THE CHANGES, PALATABLE TO THE SENATE, BUT HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE SENATE AND GET THEIR APPROVAL, AND THE SENATE IS NOT GOING TO APPROVE ANYTHING THAT'S NOT GOING TO FIT WITH THE DEAL THEY NEGOTIATED WITH THE GOVERNOR.

SO THE THOUGHT WAS THAT THE HOUSE FELT LIKE THEY WERE BEING BOXED INTO RUBBER STAMP THIS BUDGET, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT?

THE HOUSE REPUBLICANS CHOSE TO NOT NEGOTIATE WITH THE SENATE AND WITH THE GOVERNOR.

THE HOUSE DEMOCRATS WERE NEGOTIATING, BUT THE HOUSE REPUBLICANS WENT IT ALONE, AND PASSED THE FRIDAY THE 13th BUDGET, LIVING UP TO THAT NAME.

>> WELL, I THINK THE ISSUE IS HERE CAN, THAT BUDGET PASS IN THE HOUSE?

NOW SENATOR PETERSEN SAYS HE'S GOT THE VOTES.

THEY'VE GOT THE VOTES OVER THERE TO DO IT.

YOU GOT 27 DEMOCRATS AND JUST GET AN ASSORTMENT OF A COUPLE OF REPUBLICANS AND YOU'RE THERE.

YOU ROLL RIGHT OVER THE ARIZONA FREEDOM CAUCUS AND THE MORE CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS, WHICH IS WHY THEY'RE DOING THINGS LIKE CALLING WARREN PETERSEN OF ALL PEOPLE A RINO.

>> IS THERE GOING TO BE A MONSTER TRUCK RALLY HERE?

WHAT'S HAPPENING?

>> I THINK SO -- WELL, I'M NOT SURE.

I THINK THE HOUSE HAS TO CONTINUE WITH THIS THING THEY'VE STARTED, RIGHT?

NOT JUST PASS THE BUDGET AND SAY EVERYTHING IS FINE NOW, THEY DID THIS FOR SOME SORT OF REASON AND STARTED OFF BY PUTTING UP CONSERVATIVE BUDGET THAT NO DEMOCRAT VOTED ON AT ALL, SO I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE THEY'RE TRYING TO GET TO THE POINT OF A PARTIAL GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN TO PROVE THEY'RE CONSERVATIVE ENOUGH AND BETTER THAN THE SENATE?

IF THEY ACCOMPLISH THAT, THAT'S GREAT FOR THEIR BASE, TO A DEGREE, BUT EVENTUALLY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME TOGETHER AND PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER THAT'S REAL AND BIPARTISAN, OTHERWISE THERE IS NO REAL END GAME HERE.

>> TO BE CLEAR, THERE WOULD BE A SHUTDOWN IF THEY PUT AMENDMENTS IN THERE AND THE SENATE SAID THEY'RE GONE, WE'RE ADIOS, CORRECT?

>> CORRECT.

>> IS THAT LIKELY TO HAPPEN?

>> IF IT HAS, YOU ARE GOING TO TAKE DPS OFF THE STREETS AND THE PEOPLE AWAY FROM CHASING IMMIGRANTS, AND THE STATE DES HAVE NO SERVICES THERE, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GIVE MONEY TO THE SCHOOLS.

I DON'T THINK IT'S A POPULAR THING.

AS MUCH AS IT SOUNDS LIKE IT WOULD BE FUN, IT'S NOT REALISTIC OR LIKELY POPULAR WITH VOTERS TO DO THAT.

IF YOU WANT TO BE THE ONE TO SAY HEY, VOTE FOR US, WE SHUT DOWN GOVERNMENT.

I DON'T KNOW THEY THINK THAT'S A WINNING STRATEGY, UNLESS YOU ARE IN SUCH A RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVE DISTRICT THAT NOBODY ELSE REALLY MATTERS.

>> I THINK YOU GOT TO WONDER IF OVER THE WEEKEND PEOPLE ARE EXAMINING, SAYING LAWMAKERS LOOKING IN THEIR SOULS AND SAYING WHAT AM I GOING TO DO?

STAND IN THE WAY OF GOVERNMENT BEING ABLE TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE?

I MEAN, VOTERS SAY THEY WANT PEOPLE TO WORK TOGETHER.

WE HAVE A BUDGET THAT IS BIPARTISAN.

IT'S REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRAT VOICES.

BOTH SIDES HAVE GOT THINGS, THEY DIDN'T GET THINGS THEY WANTED AND GOT SOME THINGS THEY WANTED.

SO I THINK A LOT WILL SHAKE OUT OVER THE WEEKEND MONDAY IN A WAY, IS VERY FAR AWAY FROM NOW, AND THEN THEY DO HAVE ALL OF NEXT WEEK.

SO I CAN'T PREDICT.

>> YEAH, YEAH, WHERE DO DEMOCRATS FIT IN ALL THIS?

>> I THINK THE DEMOCRATS ARE ROLLING THEIR EYES.

AT LEAST IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

THE HOUSE DEMOCRATS PUT OUT A STATEMENT AND SAID WE'RE THE ADULTS IN THE ROOM.

WE'RE AT THE TABLE AND READY TO WORK.

THIS WASN'T OUR DECISION, WHICH IS VERY TRUE.

IT WAS MOSTLY LEADERSHIP'S DECISION, AND THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, STEVE MONTENEGRO, IS VERY UNRESPONSIVE.

HE DID THIS AND EVERYBODY WENT HOME.

I TRIED TO TALK TO HIM EARLIER THIS WEEK, HE GAVE ME THE MOST GENERIC STATEMENT OF ALL TIME.

HE SAID WE'RE WORKING ON A BUDGET.

>> HELPFUL.

THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE, THE BIGGEST THING, OBTAIN HOUSE VERSION IS A LITTLE MORE CONSERVATIVE, A LITTLE LESS SPENDING.

WHAT ARE THE REAL FLASH POINTS HERE?

>> WELL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S REALISTIC.

THAT BUDGET WAS A NON-STARTER AND KATIE HOBBS SAID SO.

THERE IS NONPOLICY STUFF.

THAT'S WHAT PETERSEN DIDN'T WANT.

KEEPING POLICY TO SEPARATE BILLS IS WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT.

THE HOUSE COMING IN WITH CONSERVATIVE IDEAS AND POLICY AND WANTING THOSE TO BE INCORPORATED INTO THE BUDGET WOULD NOT PASS TO THE GOVERNOR AND POTENTIALLY NOT PASS THROUGH THE COURT SYSTEM.

I ASSUME THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE ADVOCATING FOR AND NOT LITTLE SPENDING PROJECTS.

>> ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK IS IN THE BUDGET AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW IT COULD BE A BUDGET BILL IS TO REIN IN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR HER TO PROSECUTE ALLEGATIONS OF POLITICAL CORRUPTION, WHICH, OF COURSE, WOULD BE LIKE THE FAKE ELECTORS.

THEY WANT HER TO HAVE TO COME TO THEM TO GET APPROVAL BEFORE SHE CAN PROSECUTE ANY OF THEM.

I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT'S A BUDGET ISSUE, BUT THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS IN THE HOUSE BUDGET THAT'S CRAZY.

>> YEAH, A LOT OF IT IS POLICY, WHICH CAMRYN SAID.

STATE SUPREME COURT RULED YOU CANNOT PUT POLICE INTO THE BUDGET.

THE BUDGET IS ABOUT MONEY AND ALLOCATING MONEY, AND I THINK ONE OF THE CALMER VOICES THROUGHOUT ALL THIS WAS SENATOR JOHN KAVANAGH WHO LED THE BUDGET NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE SENATE, AND HE SAID, LOOK, THERE'S A LOT OF STUFF WE LIKE IN THE HOUSE VERSION.

LET'S BE REALISTIC.

WE HAVE A DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR, ELECTIONS ARE CONSEQUENCES.

HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE HEARD THAT FROM REPUBLICANS.

GET WITH IT, PEOPLE.

IF YOU WANT SOMETHING DIFFERENT, WE'LL WAIT AND ELECT A REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR.

>> DIDN'T CAVANAUGH HAVE A $5 MILLION PET FUND, WHAT WAS THAT ALL ABOUT?

>> THE DARK SKY DISCOVERY CENTER UP IN FOUNTAIN HILLS.

IT'S IN THE BUDGET.

THERE'S MONEY FOR THAT.

>> SO IT WENT -- PEOPLE CALL IT A SLUSH FUND, IT WAS $5 MILLION FOR CERTAIN FOLKS THAT MADE IT IN?

>> THE WAY THEY DID IT A FEW YEARS AGO, THEY SPLIT UP THE MONEY, SURPLUS MONEY TO SPEND, AND EVERY REPUBLICAN GOT A PORTION OF IT TO THEMSELVES, AND THIS YEAR THE SENATE HAD A SIMILAR CONCEPT, A DIFFERENT AMOUNT OF MONEY, A 90-90-90 IDEA.

SENATE REPUBLICANS GOT $90 MILLION TO SPEND HOW THEY WANTED.

THE GOVERNOR GOT 90, GOVERNOR/DEMOCRATS AND THE HOUSE REPUBLICANS HAVE 90 IT.

MEANT ROAD PROJECTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE AND DISCOVERY CENTER, WHATEVER IT'S CALLED.

BUT THE HOUSE REPUBLICANS LEFT SPACE FOR BECAUSE THEY WERE WAITING FOR HOUSE REPUBLICANS TO COME TO THE TABLE, AND WASN'T UNTIL THE PAST WEEK THAT SOME OF THAT GOT INCORPORATED REALISTICALLY UP TO WHAT THEY THOUGHT WOULD GET THE HOUSE ON BOARD AND CLEARLY THAT WASN'T ENOUGH FOR THEM.

>> ANOTHER ASPECT OF THIS SENATE BUDGET THAT WAS INTERESTING IS THAT, AS WE SAID, IT WAS THE SENATE REPUBLICANS AND THE DEMOCRATS FROM BOTH CHAMBERS NEGOTIATING IT, YET THE SENATE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP VOTED AGAINST ALMOST ALL THE BILLS.

AFTER BEING AT THE TABLE.

>> I THINK BECAUSE THERE WAS MONEY IN THERE FOR INTERDICTION AT THE BORDER, NOT THAT THERE IS ANYBODY LEFT AT THE BORDER, BUT BORDER INTERDICTION AND DRUG ENFORCEMENT AND THAT MONEY HAS ALWAYS BEEN IN THE BUDGET, BUT GIVEN THAT LIFE IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THIS YEAR UNDER THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, THEY DIDN'T WANT TO PROVIDE THAT MUCH MORE MONEY TO GO AFTER IMMIGRANTS.

>> LAURIE, BILLS OF NOTE, THE CHASE FIELD RENO IMPROVEMENT, PASSED THE SENATE, HEAD TO BILL.

PASSED THE $5 BILLION CAP.

WAS THAT CAP WHAT THE GOVERNOR WANTED?

>> THE CAP IS WHAT SHE AGREED TO, WHETHER SHE WANTED IT OR NOT.

IT WAS ACCEPTABLE TO HER, IT DIVERTS $500 MILLION IN TAX MONEY, I THINK SALES TAX AND SOME INCOME TAX MONEY, TO -- FROM THE GENERAL TAX FUND THIS THE DIAMONDBACKS.

THEY THEN HAVE TO ADD IN ANOTHER 250 MILLION?

250 MILLION.

INTERESTING THING TO ME, THERE'S INFLATION FACTOR IN THERE OF 3% SO REALLY 500 MILLION IS PROBABLY MORE LIKE A BILLION.

WHEN YOU GET DONE WITH IT, OVER 30 YEARS.

INTERESTINGLY, THEY GET 3% INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.

THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS ONLY GET 2%.

THAT TELLS WHERE YOU OUR PRIORITIES ARE.

>> AND WE CAN'T LEAVE THE DIAMONDBACKS ISSUE WITHOUT NORTH THAT THE VOTES ON THAT WERE VERY INTERESTING AND ACCOMPANIED BY POETRY.

SO WE HAD A LONG ODE FROM SENATOR MITZI EPSTEIN ABOUT BILLIONAIRE, THE BILLIONAIRE MONSTER, AND THEN JAKE HOFFMAN WHO OPPOSED THE BILL CAME UP WITH HIS OWN VERSION OF CASEY AT THE BAT.

IT WAS LEVITY AND STUNNING TO SEE THESE TWO VERY OPPOSITE IDLOGICAL ENDS AGREE ON AN ISSUE.

>> DID HE COME UP WITH IT OR A.I.

GENERATEED?

>> I DIDN'T THINK HE COULD WRITE THAT FAST.

[LAUGHTER] >> IS THIS VERSION SOMETHING THAT WAS BETTER THAN PREVIOUS VERSIONS THAT THE CITY OF PHOENIX ESPECIALLY MAYOR KATE GALLEGO WAS VOCAL ABOUT SAYING, SAYING THIS ISN'T GOING TO CUT IT.

>> I THINK PHOENIX IS HAPPIER THAN THEY WERE.

LOOKS LIKE A LOT OF NEGOTIATING UP UNTIL THE POINT OF THE VOTE.

THEY'VE BEEN WORKING ON IT THE WHOLE TIME.

THE GOVERNOR'S STAFF INCLUDED, AND LOOKS LIKE THERE ARE BENEFITS OF OWNING LAND.

I EXPECT THEY ARE HAPPIEST WITH THIS VERSION AND EXPECT THE GOVERNOR TO SIGN IT.

I DON'T KNOW HOW THE HOUSE IS GOING TO HANDLE ALL THESE THINGS.

>> THE ONE QUESTION I HAVE AND NOT EVER CLEAR TO ME.

IT'S TAX MONEY GENERATED IN THE STADIUM AND ADJACENT TO THE STADIUM, BUT NEVER DEFINE WHAT ADJACENT MEANS DOES, THAT MEAN FIVE MILES DOWN THE ROAD, GETTING READY TO BUILD ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT OR SOMETHING THERE.

THEY HAVEN'T EXPLAINED WHAT ADJACENT MEANS.

>> REALLY?

THAT'S STILL SOMEWHAT AMBIGUOUS?

>> AS FAR AS I KNOW.

>> WOW.

WE'LL LEAVE IT THERE ON THE FIELD.

WHAT HAPPENED TO PROP 123?

I'M HEARING NOTHING ABOUT IT.

WHAT HAPPENED?

>> WELL, THEY TOOK SOME VOTES ON IT THIS WEEK, NOTHING TO THE FINAL STAGE.

PROP 123 IS MONEY FOR THE STATE LAND TRUST TO HELP PUBLIC EDUCATION FUNDING.

GOING TO EXPIRE NEXT WEEK, AND THERE'S WIDESPREAD INTEREST AND SUPPORT FOR EXTENDING THAT.

LIKE OKAY, LET'S KEEP THE MONEY FLOWING, BUT YOU KNOW DEVIL'S IN THE DETAILS AND COULDN'T REACH IN AGREEMENT.

WE'LL SEE.

I THINK THE SENATE, THE THOUGHT WAS THE SENATE SHOULD LEAD ON THIS AND NEVER BROUGHT THE BILL UP, AND THERE ARE LOTS OF LITTLE DETAILS THAT WERE NOT IRONED OUT YET.

>> THOUGHT THE HOUSE HAD SOMETHING IN THERE, DIDN'T THEY?

>> THERE IS ON-AGAIN/OFF-AGAIN, THE HOUSE HAD SOMETHING ON THE BOARD AND IT GOT HELD UP IN COMMITTEE.

SO LOOKS LIKE THERE'S AN APPETITE TO DO THIS BUT THE QUESTION, THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS AND WHAT WOULD BE IN THE PROPOSAL, AND WE HEARD TALK OF IT TIED TO ESAs, HOW MUCH MONEY THEY WANT TO USE FOR THAT.

I THINK THERE'S DEFINITELY AN APPETITE IN BOTH CHAMBERS AND DEMOCRATS WANT TO MOVE SOMETHING FORWARD THAT WOULD RAISE TEACHER SALARIES.

THEY TALK ABOUT THAT ALL THE TIME, NOT IF IT'S THE WAY SOME REPUBLICANS PROPOSED IT.

IT'S POSSIBLE THEY COULD LEAVE TO ON THE TABLE FOR YET ANOTHER SESSION AND LET IT EXPIRE.

>> AND HERE'S THE THING.

THE SCHOOLS AREN'T GOING TO LOSE MONEY BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH THE CURRENT PROP 123 EXPIRES, THERE'S MONEY BUILT INTO THE GENERAL FUND THAT'S GOING TO GO TO THE SCHOOLS TO MAKE UP FOR THAT.

SO THEY GOT ANOTHER YEAR.

THE DEADLINE IS WAY FAR AWAY.

>> WAY FAR AWAY IN AN ELECTION YEAR.

EVERYTHING IS TOUGHER IN AN ELECTION YEAR, WHICH IS EVERY OTHER YEAR IN THIS STATE FOR THE LEGISLATURE.

I THINK IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT THEY GET IT DONE THIS YEAR, BUT IF THE SENATE IS NOT COMING BACK, IT'S A MOOT POINT.

>> THE SENATE BILL REGARDING ACCESS AND ENROLLMENT FOR CHILDLESS ADULTS AND THESE THINGS.

WHAT'S NEW?

>> WELL, THE HOUSE BUDGET IN THE BILL WOULD FREEZE ENROLLMENT FOR CHILDLESS ADULTS.

THIS IS PEOPLE WHO MAKE MORE THAN THE MINIMUM -- PART OF THE MEDICAID EXPANSION GROUP, AND WOULD FREEZE ENROLLMENT BECAUSE THE THINKING IS, WELL, THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IS GOING TO CUT THAT MONEY ANYWAY, SO LET'S NOT LET THEM IN TO BEGIN WITH AND DON'T HAVE TO DUMP THEM OUT, AND IT'S LESS PAINFUL.

SO THAT WAS THEIR IDEA.

THE SENATE WAS NOT INTERESTED IN THAT IDEA.

THAT'S NOT IN THEIR BUDGET.

SO AS OF NOW, THERE WILL BE NO CUTS TO AHCCCS.

IF THIS IS THE BUDGET, THE SENATE BUDGET IS THE ONE THAT GOES THROUGH.

>> BUT I SEE IT AS A SIGN OF WHAT MIGHT BE COMING.

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL OUT OF CONGRESS ULTIMATELY WILL LOOK LIKE AND WHAT IMPACT ON MEDICAID WILL BE.

I'M SURE MEDICAID IS IN THE CROSSHAIRS.

>> A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE INTERESTED IN THAT FROM D.C.

BUT AS FAR AS ARIZONA IS CONCERNED, CAMRYN STRAIGHT TO YOU ON THIS ONE.

AG TO URBANVILLE, LOOKS LIKE A DEAL WAS MADE BETWEEN THE GOVERNOR AND REPUBLICANS, CORRECT?

>> CORRECT.

AG TO URBAN BASICALLY MEANS ALLOWING FARMERS TO RETIRE WATER RIGHTS TO A DEGREE AND SELL LAND TO HOME BUILDERS IN PARTS OF THE METRO AREA WHICH GROUND WATER IS RESTRICTED BECAUSE WE HAVE LOW LEVELS.

IT'S A LITTLE COMPLICATED BUT NOT AS BAD AS IT SOUNDS.

THE IDEA BEHIND THIS IS BECAUSE OF THE HOUSING MORATORIUM THAT HOBBS ANNOUNCED.

IT WOULD BE A PATHWAY TO CREATE MORE HOUSING AND SAVE ON WATER.

SUPPOSED TO BE A WIN-WIN.

IT'S OPTIONAL.

FARMERS CAN PARTICIPATE, BUT DON'T HAVE TO IF THEY DON'T WANT TO.

THERE'S LOTS OF FIGHTING WHAT PROPOSAL THEY SHOULD USE AND HOW MUCH WATER PEOPLE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO USE IN THE PROPOSAL.

AND HOBBS' WATER PROPOSAL NOT GOING TO THE LEGISLATURE BUT ON THEIR OWN, AND THE REPUBLICANS ARE MAD ABOUT THAT AND DIDN'T LIKE THAT VERSION OF IT, AND SHOULD BE A LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION.

IT'S EXCITING THEY MANAGED TO COME TO A DEAL, I WASN'T SURE THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO HANDLE IT AND PASS SOMETHING.

THE GOVERNOR TWEETED ABOUT IT, SEEMS HAPPY WITH IT.

I'M SURPRISED THAT I EXPECTED HER TO USE THAT AS LEVERAGE, AND I THINK THERE IS THOUGHT FROM RURAL FOLKS WHO WANTED MORE ON GROUND WATER CONSERVATION SHE WAS SUPPOSED TO USE IT AS LEVERAGE AND MIGHT LET THEMSELVES GET ENROLLED.

SHOPE CALLED IT THE MOST CONSEQUENTIAL WATER LEGISLATION IN DECADES, WHICH IS KIND OF TRUE.

>> YOU ARE TALKING 400,000+ ACRES OF FARMLAND AND A MILLION HOMES AND LESS WATER USED.

>> YEAH.

>> HERE'S THE OTHER PART OF IT.

THIS IS SOLD AS A WAY TO GET AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND I WILL SIT BACK AND WAIT AND SEE WHAT PRICE TAGS THOSE HOMES COME WITH.

>> LAURIE, FOREIGN OWNED LAND.

THIS WAS AN INTERESTING PUSH AND SHOVE, WASN'T IT?

>> YEAH, ORIGINALLY HAD A BILL THAT WOULD HAVE BANNED OUR ENEMIES FROM HAVING LAND NEAR SENSITIVE PROJECTS HERE NEAR INSTALLATIONS FOR THE MILITARY, NEAR POWER PLANTS, ET CETERA.

THAT'S CHINA AND IRAN AND RUSSIA AND THE LIKE.

THE BILL WAS WAY WATERED DOWN IN THE SENATE, OR THE HOUSE, BEFORE IT WENT TO THE GOVERNOR, AND SHE VETOED IT AND SAID COME BACK TO ME WITH A REAL BILL, AND SHE ACTUALLY PROPOSED A MUCH STRONGER BILL THAT WOULD HAVE DONE THE THINGS THAT THE LEGISLATURE SAID THEY WANTED TO DO.

OF COURSE, YOU CAN'T GIVE HER A WIN.

ELECTIONS ARE COMING UP NEXT YEAR, AND GOING TO BE A BRUTAL RACE.

THEY WEREN'T ABOUT TO GO BACK TO ORIGINAL, NOT SO FAR.

THE SENATE IS GONE, SO I DON'T SEE ANYTHING HAPPENING ON THAT, AND IT'S A SHAME, BOTH SIDES, MOST PEOPLE AGREE, WE DON'T WANT OUR ENEMIES TO OWN LAND NEXT TO LUKE AIR FORCE BASE, BUT COULDN'T AGREE BECAUSE POLITICS INTRUDE AS POLITICS ALWAYS DOES.

>> SO THE ORIGINAL BILL WAS VETOED.

SOMETHING HAPPENED WHERE THE GOVERNOR SAID GET TOUGHER ON THIS, THEY GOT TOUGH OR THIS AND IT FLOATED AWAY?

>> AND SHE ALSO CAME OUT WITH HER OWN PROPOSAL WHICH IS WHAT SHE PUT OUT THERE FOR LAWMAKERS TO PICK UP.

YOU KNOW, LIKE LAURIE SAID, YOU DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO GIVE HER A WIN.

REPUBLICANS TWEETING ABOUT THAT.

THIS IS NOT A BAD IDEA, BUT WE CAN'T GIVE HER A WIN ON THIS.

NOTHING HAPPENED.

>> THAT MAKE SENSE TO YOU?

>> SURE, WHY NOT?

>> ANIMAL CRUELTY, DID THE BILL GET PLACEED?

>> IT PASSED.

TALK ABOUT WATERED DOWN.

ANIMAL CRUELTY BILL WAS INSPIRED BY THE HORRIBLE CASE IN CHANDLER, 55 DOGS ON ONE PROPERTY IN TERRIBLE CONDITIONS.

DEAD PUPPIES IN A FREEZER, IT WAS AWFUL.

BUT THE LAW ENFORCEMENT SAID THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE PROPER LAWS TO REALLY PROSECUTE THE CASE AS THEY WANTED TO, AS THEY SHOULD, SO THIS BILL WOULD BASICALLY EXPAND THE DEFINITION OF WHAT ANIMAL CRUELTY IS, AND INITIALLY REQUIRED YOU TO FEED YOUR ANIMALS PROPER, DRINKABLE WATER AND FOOD APPROPRIATE FOR THE SPECIES.

I CAN'T FEED MY GUINEA PIG RAW MEAT, AND SHELTER.

THERE WAS A LOT OF PUSHBACK FROM GROUPS WHO WERE CONCERNED IT WOULD AFFECT LIVESTOCK AND FARMERS AND THOUGH THERE WERE CARVEOUTS FOR THAT, AND THOUGH THERE WAS A SPONSOR, BULLOCK CALLED IT POLITICAL, TPUSA WAS AGAINST IT.

THEY DON'T LIKE HER EITHER, I THINK THE FOOD AND WATER WAS TAKEN OUT.

IT SAYS SOME ANIMALS HAVE TO HAVE SOME SHELTER SOMETIME.

>> AND MEDICAL CARE.

IT DOES SAY YOU COULD CITE SOMEBODY IF THEY WITHHELD MEDICAL CARE TO THE POINT IT WOULD CAUSE UNREASONABLE SUFFERING, WHICH LED TO INTERESTING FLORIDA BASE.

SAID WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE BETTER MEDICAL CARE FOR PETS -- THESE ARE PETS IN PEOPLE'S HOMES WHO DON'T HAVE A LOT OF MONEY, AND WHAT ABOUT HEALTH CARE FOR THEIR KIDS?

>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

WHY DON'T WE PROVIDE BETTER HEALTH CARE?

MAYBE COLLEAGUES GET IN FRONT OF THAT NEXT YEAR.

>> I MIGHT GET AN ANGRY PHONE CALL.

WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT A CRIME TO NOT GIVE FOOD, WATER AND SHELTER TO PETS BUT NOT A CRIME FOR KIDS?

I'M PRETTY SURE IT IS A CRIME.

HELLO?

>>S OUT -- OUTSIDE OF THE RECORDER AND THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, THEY DON'T GET ALONG LAURIE.

>> JUSTIN HEAP WAS ELECTED.

HE'S, WHAT I WOULD CALL, ELECTION DENIER ADJACENT.

HE'S NEVER REALLY BEEN CLEAR WHAT HE BELIEVES AS TO THE 2020 AND 2022 ELECTIONS OR 2024, AND MANY PEOPLE JUST THINK HE WANTS TO GET IN THERE AND CAUSE HAVOC TO THE SYSTEM BECAUSE HE THINKS THERE'S FRAUD AND WHO KNOWS WHAT HE THINKS BECAUSE HE'S COY ABOUT THAT.

HE'S BEEN FIGHTING WITH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTENDING THEY TOOK AWAY HIS POWER, NEGOTIATED WITH STEPHEN RICHER WHO TOOK AWAY HIS POWER.

HE SUED THE SUPERVISORS, THE SUPERVISORS COUNTERSUED HIM, AND HE'S GONE TO THE LEGISLATURE TRYING TO GET MONEY TO DO WHAT HE WANTS TO DO.

NOBODY IS SURE, IT CHANGES DAY IN AND DAY OUT, THE SUPERVISORS ARE ANGRY AT THE THOUGHT OF THAT, AND IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO PLAY ITSELF OUT.

I THINK WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN IS THE COURTS HAVE TO SPELL OUT IN AN ELECTION WHO DOES WHAT?

IT'S A BIFURCATED SYSTEM.

THE RECORDER IS IN CHARGE OF CERTAIN THINGS VOTER REGISTRATION AND EARLY BALLOTING AND THE SUPERVISORS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ELECTION DAY, AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S SORT OF DIFFICULT TO SPREAD OUT.

>> THEN WE GOT THE RECORDER SAYING I GOT MY ATTORNEY, BY THE WAY, AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEY SAYING YES, YOU DO.

IT'S ME AND NOT THAT PERSON OVER THERE.

THERE'S A DISAGREEMENT THERE.

>> YEP, AND THEY'RE IN COURT TO LITIGATE THAT.

RACHEL MITCHELL SENT A NASTY GRAM TO JAMES RODGERS, WITH THE AMERICAN FIRST LEGAL FOUNDATION LAST WEEK AND SAID STAND DOWN.

MAYBE YOU DIDN'T REALIZE THIS, BUT I'M THE ATTORNEY, YOU CANNOT REPRESENT HIM.

AND ON THAT BASIS, THIS LAWSUIT HEAP FILED IS INVALID BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT ATTORNEY.

MEANWHILE WE'RE PAYING FOR BOTH SIDES.

>> ALL RIGHT, WE WILL STOP IT RIGHT THERE.

I WANT TO GET A REPORT IN HERE.

THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.

GOOD CONVERSATION.

BEFORE WE GO, I WANT TO GET A REPORT ON ATTORNEY GENERAL KRIS MAYES FILING AMICUS BRIEF TODAY, SHE WAS LEADING A COALITION OF A COUPLE DOZEN ATTORNEY GENERALS ACROSS THE UNITED STATES, THE BRIEF SUPPORTS LAWSUITS BY PBR AND PBS REGARDING PROPOSED FUNDING CUTS TO PUBLIC MEDIA.

IN THE AMICUS BRIEF, EMERGENCY ALERT SYSTEMS WERE MENTIONED, TOXIC SPILLS, WEATHER WARNINGS, THOSE THINGS, HOW IMPORTANT THEY ARE IN RURAL AREAS AND 95% OF THE STATE IS COVERED BY PUBLIC MEDIA.

EDUCATION WAS MENTIONED A LOT.

PBS KIDS EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS, ESPECIALLY HOW IMPORTANT THE HOME LEARNING PROGRAMS WERE DURING THE PANDEMIC.

THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BY THE ATTORNEYS GENERAL AND THE BENEFIT OF KIDS CAMPS WAS MENTIONED HERE IN ARIZONA.

ESPECIALLY THE OVERALL SUCCESS OF THE EDUCATIONAL OUTREACH TEAM.

PUBLIC MEDIA'S WORK WITH TRIBES ESPECIALLY ARIZONA PBS, THE DISPROPORTIONATE THREAT TO THOSE COMMUNITIES.

THE AMICUS FILED BY KRIS MAYES WITH 22 OR 23 OTHER ATTORNEYS GENERAL.

PUBLIC MEDIA IS DESERVING OF MORE SUPPORT, NOT LESS.

THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED AS FAR AS AMICUS BRIEF.

OUR AUDIENCE IS INTERESTED IN THAT PARTICULAR STORY.

THAT'S THE LATEST AND THAT'S IT.

I'M TED SIMONS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

YOU HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND.