Afterwards, I went to the House Appropriations committee, where they were mostly talking about SB1236, which had a strike-everything amendment being offered that would essentially do the same thing as another bill I discussed earlier the initiative process (which banned paying circulators by the signature). Somewhere along the way that earlier bill had died, and so the House was taking another go with this amendment. During this discussion, Rep. Fernandez brought up the quote of the day, which I chose because it gave a different and unexpected perspective on legislating. Even though many people complain that legislators don't do enough, Rep. Fernandez was arguing that more time should be spent on the process. I also felt like the conversation in the committee better explains some of the things that I have been trying to convey to you all with my quotes way better than I have been able to, so I really encourage all of you to watch:
"What's the rush?"--3/29/17
Hello everyone! Today I went down to the House floor, where they were talking about lobbyists and abortions, which I will choose not to talk about in depth for reasons you can imagine. But if you want, you can watch the floor debate here, it was very interesting to watch.
Hey mimi! Sad that your project is almost over... do the legislators ever ask you what you're doing there or for your opinions on controversial issues? How does everyone handle the more partisan, controversial issues. Arizona being a red state, does everyone usually agree with the more conservative stances?
ReplyDeleteHi Anuka! I know! I will miss all of the legislators. No one really asks for my opinion, just because it becomes awkward if you all disagree and I guess many will assume I am republican since I am shadowing a republican legislator. When things get partisan, they stay surprisingly polite. People maintain decorum 99.9% of the time, and most of the times republicans and democrats who were asking each other the tough questions three seconds earlier will be seen laughing and chatting a minute later. In the end, people agree to disagree- but yes, to your second question, they do disagree. The legislature is surprisingly more split than I thought it was, with the split being 35/25 republicans/democrats, and many disagree about the conservative ideology.
DeleteHey Mimi, what do you think Fernandez meant when he said he wants to spend more time on legislating? Longer work days? Longer sessions?
ReplyDeleteHi Jack! I think what Rep. Fernandez meant when she said that was that we spend more time debating and not introducing amendments last minute. In other words, when a bill is considered in a committee, not for people to vote yes, acknowledging it is flawed, in hopes that it will be addressed in later amendments, but to vote no and try again next year. Or in a different but also common situation, to not introduce legislation in a strike everything amendment but in another bill next year. Of course, Republicans would probably respond with "then nothing would get done", but I thought it was a very interesting perspective to how bills are made
Deletehey Mimi? It seems like much of what's going on is decided when the legislature isn't in session, since most bills seem to pass with little contention. I'm interested in knowing how often legislators change their opinion on bills, and why they do, whether from new information or convincing argument.
ReplyDeleteHi Trey! From what I've seen, many of the bills are drafted and decided upon not in session, but people decide how they will vote in session. What often occurs is if a legislator is in the majority party, during committee they will vote yes unless they have serious problems with the intent of the bill, even if a few details they disagree with. Then later, if they have issues, they will meant with the sponsor of the bill to incorporate their concerns in an amendment, which the sponsor will most likely adopt in order to get his/her colleagues vote on the floor (although if this does not happen and concerns are not addressed it will turn into a no vote). If the legislator is a democrat, they will do the same, but they are less likely to get their concerns incorporated because many times they just flat out disagree with the bills intent (so no amendment will turn them into a yes), or that they won't get it amended to their pleasure because the sponsor doesn't need his/her vote as much as a member of the majority party. Either way, a legislator's vote doesn't really change from committee to floor (aka at all). There are some exceptions, but this happens most of the time because JLBC (the joint legislative budget committee) releases a fiscal note that reveals some unintended financial consequences or that it will end up costing the state a lot of money, or maybe some other new information that has arisen. However, convincing arguments usually don't get people to change their votes, unless within committee someone comes forward to testify that points out an unintended consequence of the bill that was unknown to the sponsor and other committee members (but of course, in that case many times it will still pass and then get amended to address that concern, so anyone who voted yes will still vote yes. I hope that answers your question, and I really hope you actually read this and I didn't just waste my time.
DeleteHey Mimi! It's really cool that you can integrate yourself in such pivotal House discussions. Gosh, I'm so jealous! Best of luck :-)
ReplyDeleteThanks! your comment was the easiest to answer (see-trey), so really thanks
Delete