District 23 state Senator Steve Smith announced July 20, 2011 as the launch date of the border fence donation website where residents can donate to the privately funded fence construction effort on the border. Governor Brewer approved the border fence fund in May. Senator Smith will be hosting a launch party in Casa Grande for the website where he will be joined by other conservative lawmakers.

Read the rest of the story here. http://www.goldcanyontoday.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1746&Itemid=189

"The U.S. Supreme Court this morning ruled the matching funds provision of Arizona’s taxpayer-funded campaign finance system unconstitutional. This is a victory for Arizona and a victory for free speech. The Court rightly found that matching funds illegally discourages private candidates from raising and spending cash in elections.

The Court ruled that matching funds present a substantial burden to free speech rights. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote “the First Amendment embodies our choice as a nation that, when it comes to speech, the guiding principle is freedom—the unfettered exchange of ideas—not whatever the State may view as fair”.

It made no sense that as privately-funded candidates raised money for their campaigns, it triggered taxpayer subsidies for the opposing candidates. This was an experiment that failed, and now it has been ruled unconstitutional by the highest court in the land. Good riddance. This ruling follows an Arizona Supreme Court ruling on Friday dealing with another big issue.

The Court rejected the request of public interest attorneys to place an injunction on the AHCCCS enrollment freeze scheduled to take effect Friday. The justices understand that there is not sufficient funding to maintain one of the richest Medicaid programs in the country. Arizonahas gone above and beyond what is federally required and can no longer foot the bill. These tough times have prompted tough decisions, and it is encouraging to see that reflected in the court’s decision.”

Sen. Steve Pierce, a Republican from Prescott, has been named the 2011 Senator of the Year by the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry. Pierce is Majority Whip and has been a member of the Senate since 2009.

“Senator Pierce’s hard work in 2011 stood out. He has a strong pro-business record and this year he was focused on shepherding job-creation legislation to passage. We applaud his support of the economic competitiveness package and for his leadership within his caucus,” says Glenn Hamer, president and CEO of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

“Sen. Pierce knows that doing the right thing isn’t always the popular thing. We commend him for his work to advance to the ballot a measure to eliminate public funding for political campaigns. It’s a stance that might not earn him the title of Mr. Popular among his colleagues, but we believe his leadership on this and other important issues helps make Arizona a better place to work and live,” says Hamer.

Sen. Pierce is a third-generation Arizonan, a graduate of Prescott High School and the University of Arizona. He operates the ranch outside Prescott that his father acquired fifty years ago.

The 2011 Chamber Awards Luncheon honoring Sen. Pierce and others is being held June 24 at the Scottsdale Plaza Resort.

Sen. Sylvia Allen is calling together a group of wildfire experts and State Senators to learn more about the tragic fires burning in our state and to develop the best public policy to avoid massive wildfires in our future. A public hearing is scheduled for Thursday, June 30 at Show Low High School, beginning at 1 p.m.

Dr. Wally Covington, a nationally-recognized leader in wildfire practices and Director of Northern Arizona University’s Ecological Restoration Institute will speak. Other speakers include Navajo County Board of Supervisors Chairman David Tenney and Dr. Dave Garrett, the former Dean of NAU’s School of Forestry.

“It is obvious something is happening in our state that needs to change. The five largest fires in Arizona history have all occurred in the past decade. Fires are burning hotter, faster and larger,” says Sen. Allen, a Republican from Snowflake.

Sen. Allen is already supporting ideas that will make Arizona lands safer and improve the state economy. She’s looking at salvage timber sales, environmental law reforms and long-term contracts with businesses willing to invest millions to build infrastructure.

“I’ve sent letters to Senators Jon Kyl and John McCain and Congressmen Flake and Gosar, emphasizing the importance of the state and federal government working together to properly manage our lands. We owe it to our citizens,” says Sen. Allen.

Members of the Maricopa Community Colleges Governing Board last night voted 3-2 to keep tuition at levels set in March and scheduled to go into effect in July. This action negated an effort led by Board President Randolph Lumm to reconsider the March vote and continue to allow illegal aliens to qualify for in-state tuition. State law clearly bars community colleges from granting illegals in-state tuition.

Sen. Linda Gray learned from board member Debra Pearson that the MCC Governing Board was holding a special meeting Tuesday night, to consider backing out of a March tuition agreement that finally put the Colleges in compliance with Proposition 300. That is the proposition passed by more than 70% of Arizona voters in 2006, barring illegal immigrants from in-state tuition.

Sen. Gray moved quickly to write a letter to Attorney General Tom Horne, alerting him to the issue and raising questions about the legality of such a move by the Board. The letter was also signed by Senate President Russell Pearce and numerous Republican Senators and Representatives. In the letter, she included direct wording from Proposition 300.

A person who is not a citizen of the United States, who is without lawful immigration status and who is enrolled as a student at . . . any community college under the jurisdiction of a community college district is not entitled to tuition waivers, fee waivers, grants, scholarship assistance, financial aid, tuition assistance or any other type of financial assistance that is subsidized or paid in whole or in part with state monies.

Sen. Gray also asked the Attorney General about possible penalties a community college might face for classifying those not lawfully present in the United States as in-state students. With the vote of the Board last night, MCC will not face penalties, and the District is back in compliance with state law.

June 20, 2011

Honorable Tom Horne

Arizona Attorney General

1275W. Washington Street

Phoenix,AZ 85007-2926

RE: Community colleges; student not lawfully present in U.S.

Dear Attorney General Horne:

I am writing to you about the classification by a community college district of a person who is not lawfully present in the United States for tuition purposes.

Proposition 300, approved by 71.4% of the voters in 2006 specifies that a person who is without lawful immigration status is not entitled to classification as an in state student or entitled to classification as a county resident. See Proposition 300, codified in part at Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 15 1803. Presumably a person who is without lawful immigration status would be eligible to receive the out of state or out of county tuition rate established by the community college district.

However, A.R.S. § 15 1825, also part of Proposition 300, further specifies that: A person who is not a citizen of the United States, who is without lawful immigration status and who is enrolled as a student at . . . any community college under the jurisdiction of a community college district is not entitled to tuition waivers, fee waivers, grants, scholarship assistance, financial aid, tuition assistance or any other type of financial assistance that is subsidized or paid in whole or in part with state monies.

(Emphasis added.) If the out of state or out of county tuition rate does not cover the full cost to educate a student who is not a United States citizen or who is without lawful immigration status, the broad prohibition in A.R.S. § 15 1825 may also disallow an out of state or out of county tuition rate if providing that classification to the student is deemed as “tuition assistance” in contravention to the statute. See also A.R.S. § 1 502 and 8 United States Code § 1621 (requiring a person who applies for any state or local public benefit, including any postsecondary education benefit, to demonstrate lawful presence in the United States and implicitly providing that a person who cannot demonstrate lawful presence is ineligible for the benefit).

With this background, may a community college district classify a person who is not lawfully present in the United Statesas an in state student or a county resident for tuition purposes? If this classification is improper, what penalties does a community college district face for providing such classifications? May a community college district create separate tuition levels to circumvent the provisions of Proposition 300?

Thank you for your assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,

Senator Linda Gray

Senator Russell Pearce

Senator Steve Pierce

Senator Sylvia Allen

Senator Rick Murphy

Senator Frank Antenori

Senator Nancy Barto

Senator Rich Crandall

Representative Jack Harper

Representative Brophy McGee

Representative KimberlyYee

Representative John Filmore

Representative Judy Burges

Representative Nancy McLain

Representative Terri Proud

“The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit is hearing arguments today on Arizona’s Constitutional and common sense groundbreaking law requiring residents to show proof of citizenship when they register to vote, and to show identification when voting. I am confident the 9th Circuit will agree that this is a common sense approach to guaranteeing voter integrity.

In 2004 Protect Arizona NOW, an Arizona Initiative: “Arizona Taxpayers and Citizens Protection Act,” passed overwhelmingly byArizonacitizens and does three things:

Proof of citizenship to register to vote. The U.S. Constitution established more than 200 years ago that only citizens may vote. The initiative requires everyone equally to prove that eligibility. The Help America Vote Act of 2002 requires states to strengthen the integrity of their voter rolls, as does Title 7, Section 12 of the Arizona Constitution.

Photo I.D. when voting. Photo I.D. is required to cash a check, apply for welfare, sign a lease, or get a rental card at a video store. Gov. Napolitano vetoed the photo I.D. Bill, stating it was illegal, yet 11 states already had laws requiring I.D. when voting. Some laws have been on the books for decades.

Proof of eligibility to receive taxpayer public benefits. This is already on the books. The initiative would require everyone to provide proof of eligibility equally. The Urban Institute studied this extensively in 1994, the University of Arizona in 2001, and estimated such costs to vary widely in the tens of millions of dollars.

I wrote Proposition 200 in 2004. Amazingly, seven years later, the open borders crowd and the federal government are still fighting to prevent us from implementing our law. Then again, maybe we shouldn’t be surprised, since then-Governor Napolitano and then-Attorney General Goddard did everything they could to block implementation of it.

I expect the 9th Circuit to agree with U.S. District Judge Roslyn Silver, who ruled in 2006 states are free to enact measures, including requiring proof of citizenship, to make sure people who sign up to vote are legally qualified to do so. We also got complete approval and support from the U.S. Justice Department on Prop. 200, as any change in voting eligibility must be approved by the U.S. Justice Department.

Have we not learned anything from recent scandals involving ACORN and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), who been found guilty of voter fraud in several states? In 2008 and in 2010 we found hundreds of thousands of incidences of suspected voter fraud across America and suspect voter fraud across Arizona. Enough is enough. It is critical we protect the integrity of our elections.”

It took more than four years for Maricopa Community Colleges to come in compliance with state law on illegal immigrants’ tuition, and now it looks like it may take just three months for the Board to reverse itself, and violate state law.

Sen. Linda Gray has learned the Maricopa Community Colleges Governing Board will hold a special meeting Tuesday night, to consider backing out of a March tuition agreement that finally put the Colleges in compliance with Proposition 300. That is the proposition passed by more than 70% of Arizona voters in 2006, barring illegal immigrants from in-state tuition.

The meeting is scheduled for 6 p.m. at the District Support Services Center at 2411 W. 14th St. in Tempe.

“Voters made it clear nearly five years ago, that illegal aliens should not earn in-state status. The Board has dragged its feet for years, but finally, with the March vote, they decided to fully follow state law,” says Sen. Gray. “Now, even before the tuition schedule goes into effect on July 1, the Board is re-considering its action. That is unacceptable.”

The wording of Proposition 300 is clear on this issue. “A person who was not a citizen or legal resident of the United States or who is without lawful immigrant status is not entitled to classification as an in-state student….”

“Years ago, voters told these schools, “Don’t use state money to subsidize tuition for illegal immigrants. It is sad that more than four years later, we are still waiting for Maricopa Community Colleges to hear the voters, and even sadder that they are considering turning their back again on those voters,” says Sen. Gray.

http://www.trivalleycentral.com/articles/2011/06/14/maricopa_monitor/county_state/doc4df26c3491c7d418394977.txt

Sen. Frank Antenori and Sen. Al Melvin appeared on Arizona Public Media Friday to talk about the recent special session at the Capitol.

http://ondemand.azpm.org/videoshorts/watch/2011/6/17/1830-special-session-special-challenges/

Senate President Russell Pearce will appear on HORIZON tonight at 7 p.m. on Channel 8.

http://www.eacourier.com/articles/2011/06/01/news/doc4de5905cb78f4542331826.txt

Pres. Russell Pearce appeard on the Fox News Channel Friday morning to talk about Arizona’s big victory at the U.S. Supreme Court.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/963382679001/big-win-for-arizona-immigration-law/

The calls come in every day from my constituents. “What is going on with gas prices?” “What’s causing the rise?” “Is anybody doing anything about it?’ Every time we pass a service station the price is higher than the day before. Mr. Attorney General, I am calling on you to investigate soaring gas prices.

In January 2009, when Barack Obama became President, unleaded gas was $1.84/gallon in Phoenix. It now averages $3.72/gallon. In Tucson, at the time of his inauguration, gas was $1.73/gallon. It is now $3.62/gallon. Prices in the two cities have gone up more than 100%, doubling in just over two years. Arizonans need some answers.

Gas prices have a tremendous impact on the budgets of our citizens. They’re filling their tanks once a week, and spending $40-100 each time. In addition, high gas prices mean higher prices at grocery stores and department stores.

Smart people have been trying to figure out what has caused the sharp increase in gas prices since the beginning of the Obama administration. U.S. demand for gas is flat, and inventories are plentiful. Some have suggested the administration’s cancelling of dozens of oil and gas drilling permits have played a role. After the Gulf oil spill, the White House imposed a long moratorium on offshore drilling. Did this help cause the spike?

Arizonans need an answer, as they await relief at the pumps. I ask that you help solve the mystery, and investigate this pressing problem.

The U.S. Supreme Court has handed our great state a significant victory. It upheld our 2007 law penalizing businesses for knowingly hiring workers who are here illegally. No longer will companies be able to ignore the rule of law and hire illegal aliens, shutting out legal Arizona workers. With the highest unemployment in a generation, we must do all we can to get Arizona back to work, and this ruling means those here legally will not have to compete with the illegal crowd. That is great news.

In 2007, I sponsored HB 2779, the “Fair and Legal Employment Act”, because I knew something needed to be done to stop the profits-over-patriotism crowd. These companies ignored the law and hired illegals, because it was cheap labor, but certainly not cheap to theArizonataxpayer. In the cost of $2.6 billion to educate, medicate and incarcerate illegal aliens. Now, with t

his Supreme Court ruling, the state has the clear right to require employers to verify work eligibility status of all new employees. The E-verify system puts the responsibility for verifying documents on the government, with 99.7% accuracy.

Now that our efforts have proven to not only be the right thing to do but to also be politically popular, you are seeing people who have fought us looking to claim credit. Then-Gov. Napolitano did sign HB 2779, but that’s not the whole story. She opposed this bill and just about every effort we made to crack down on illegal immigration, but the writing was on the wall. We were collecting thousands of signatures to put a tougher measure on the ballot. Napolitano had no choice but to sign this bill, to avoid that tougher law. All you have to do is look at her efforts as Secretary of Homeland Security to know that she believes in non-enforcement of our immigration laws.

The message is now clear to any business that is still considering hiring illegals. If you do so, you will face sanctions, and you could lose your license to operate. This is indeed a “death penalty” for those businesses that choose to hire those here illegally. Fewer illegals means more job openings for citizens looking for work. We are hoping to bring down the “help wanted” sign in our state.

Illegal aliens are getting the message that they are not welcome in Arizona. Tens of thousands of illegals have left the state since we began our efforts to crack down on illegal immigration. It is working, and our state’s taxpayers are paying less for emergency care at our hospitals and paying less for education at our schools. Our efforts are making a difference, and we will keep up the fight, with attrition by enforcement.

So what does this new ruling mean for the fate of SB 1070? I’d say it looks good. In his majority ruling, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the employer sanctions law “falls well within the confines of the authority Congress chose to leave to the states.” That is at the heart of the fight over SB 1070, and Justice Roberts is making it clear a state has the right, and in fact the duty, to uphold and enforce federal laws. It is becoming pretty clear that the U.S. Supreme Court will uphold SB 1070.

Yavapai County Assessor Pamela Pearsall has been telling residents that the Legislature is raising property taxes on homeowners. Whether it is intentional or not, she is giving an incomplete picture, and it is misleading residents.

The Legislature lowered the Class 1 property assessments this session, as part of the Governor’s Arizona Competitiveness Package. If no adjustments had been made, property taxes would have been shifted to all other property classifications, and Ms. Pearsall would be correct. But we did make an adjustment. The Homeowner’s Rebate is being increased. Everyone already gets the HR or Homeowners Rebate and you probably don’t even know it. By filing the new affidavit, everyone will be aware that they are receiving the increased rebate. Additionally, the Homeowner’s Rebate Affidavit will expose those who are claiming the rebate illegally. Rental properties have never been eligible for the rebate, but it has been happening, at a cost to you the taxpayer. HR is being used by bank owned properties, REOs, second homes, vacation homes, to which it was never intended to be. The Homeowner’s Rebate was intended to be for taxpayers on their primary residence ONLY.

Our Arizona businesses face some of the highest taxes in the country, higher than in California. Business property is currently taxed at twice the amount of residential property. In order to make Arizona competitive and attract out-of-state businesses to relocate, the Commercial Property Assessment Ratio will be reduced from 20% to 18%. This will help our economy and bring much needed jobs and revenue to the State. The homeowners rebate has been in existence for 30 years. During this time the HR percentages have changed numerous times, in 2013 the homeowner’s rebate percentage will be increased. This HR increase is designed to keep homeowner’s taxes from increasing while helping draw new business to Arizona. It is not a new tax. We only want you to know that it is there, it was increased for you, and it is illuminating those that are abusing it and costing you, the taxpayer money from the general fund.

I understand and appreciate there are going to be disagreements on the state’s taxing policies. I also believe you should hear the whole story, not just a partial one that suits the County Assessor.

(Washington, DC) — Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton and Judicial Watch client Arizona State Senate President Russell Pearce offered the following statements today regarding the Supreme Court’s decision upholding the constitutionality of Arizona’s “Legal Arizona Workers Act,” legislation crafted by Pearce to penalize Arizona businesses that knowingly hire illegal aliens (Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting, et. al,(No. 09-115)). The decision also upholds the constitutionality of the provision requiring all Arizona employers to use the E-verify system to confirm the eligibility of new employees.

“This Supreme Court decision is a tremendous victory for the rule of law. This decision will have an enormous impact on states across the country seeking to ease the burdens caused by rampant illegal immigration. State Senate President Pearce carefully crafted this legislation to be entirely consistent with federal law. And we are pleased the Supreme Court recognized once again the critical role states must play in enforcing our nation’s immigration laws. The Obama administration’s plan of lax illegal immigration enforcement, sanctuary policies and amnesty only serve to worsen the illegal immigration problem. The High Court rightly called the Obama administration’s legal arguments attacking Arizona’s commonsense statute ‘contrary to common sense’ and having ‘no basis in law, fact, or logic…’ It’s time to take the only approach that works: law enforcement,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

I applaud the Supreme Court’s decision today upholding the Legal Arizona Workers Act. This legislation is based on a simple but powerful solution to the illegal immigration crisis: enforce the law. It would be ideal if the federal government would do its job and secure the border.

However, in the absence of leadership inWashington, states like Arizona have a responsibility to protect their citizens and uphold the law. This decision ensures that scofflaw businesses that put profits over patriotism can and will be punished. At the same time it will encourage illegal aliens in search of employment in Arizona to look elsewhere,” said Arizona State Senate President Russell Pearce.

On October 28, 2010, Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief on behalf of Arizona State Senate President Russell Pearce with the United States Supreme Court. In writing his opinion in the recent Supreme Court ruling, Chief Justice Roberts echoed Judicial Watch’s principle argument: “Arizona has taken the route least likely to cause tension with federal law. It relies solely on the federal government’s own determination of who is an unauthorized alien, and it requires Arizona employers to use the federal government’s own system for checking employee status.”

(Phoenix, State Capitol) —The U.S. Supreme Court this morning upheld an Arizona law that penalize

s companies for knowingly hiring illegal aliens and requires firms to use the E-verify system.

The law came out of HB 2779, the Fair and Legal Employment Act, sponsored in 2007 by then-Rep. Russell Pearce, now Senate President.

“Arizona was the first state in the country to enact legislation to prevent illegal aliens from working. Now, the highest court in the land has given its legal authority to this law. Arizonans should be proud,” says Pres. Pearce.

Then-Gov. Janet Napolitano signed the bill into law, but that was only because of the threat of a tougher initiative going to the ballot. “Make no mistake, Gov. Napolitano did NOT support this legislation, and serving in the Obama administration, she has been fighting us all along the way.

Now that a huge majority of Arizonans are behind this, she is trying to rewrite history, and suggest she is a strong supporter. We know the truth,” says Pres. Pearce.

In his ruling for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said the employer sanctions law “falls well within the confines of the authority Congress chose to leave to the states.”

“That is an important statement. That sends a pretty clear signal to me that we are headed for U.S. Supreme Court support for SB 1070, as well,” says Pearce. “This is a huge victory for America and the American worker. It is a defeat for the open-borders, profits-over-patriotism crowd. It is a death penalty for employers who continue to hire illegals and displace American workers.”

http://www.phoenixchamber.com/news/gpcctv-2011-sentinel-award-recipients

Sen. Linda Gray appeared on HORIZON on May 24 to talk about DUI legislation