♪.

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

A LOOK AT THE WEEK'S TOP STORIES, INCLUDING STATE LAWMAKERS MOVING TO PUT ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT.

JOURNALISTS' ROUNDTABLE IS NEXT ON "ARIZONA HORIZON."

.

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

I'M TED SIMONS.

IT'S FRIDAY AND THAT MEANS IT'S TIME FOR ANOTHER EDITION OF THE JOURNALISTS' ROUNDTABLE.

JOINING US CAMRYN SANCHEZ OF KJZZ RADIO.

HOWIE FISCHER OF CAPITOL MEDIA SERVICES.

IMMIGRATION BILL, LOOKS LIKE WE COULD BE SEEING NOVEMBER BALLOT THAT INCLUDES, WHAT, ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT THAT'S TIED UP IN THE COURTS?

>> OF COURSE, THIS STARTED OUT AS A VERY SIMPLE QUOTE, UNQUOTE MEASURE OUT OF BEN TOMA WHO WANTED TO TIGHTEN UP ON THE e-VERIFY SYSTEM, EMPLOYERS ARE REQUIRED TO USE IT TO DETERMINE PEOPLE ARE HERE LEGALLY.

HE WANTED TO PUT TEETH INTO THAT AND USE e-VERIFY TO DETERMINE PUBLIC BENEFITS.

GOT IN THE HOUSE, STALLED IN THE SENATE.

THEY GOT THE MEASURE THERE, THEY SAY, OKAY, LET'S BACK OFF THE EMPLOYER STUFF BUT WE HAVE OTHER THINGS WE'D LIKE TO TAKE CARE OF.

FENTANYL BILLS, A MEASURE TO GOOSE UP THE PENALTY IF SOMEONE PROVIDED FENTANYL AND SOMEONE DIES.

ANOTHER BILL GOVERNOR HOBBS VETOED EARLY THIS YEAR WHICH HAD TO DO WITH THE QUESTION OF ALLOWING POLICY TO ENFORCE A FORMAL IMMIGRATION LAW.

IF THEY SAW SOMEONE COME ACROSS THE BORDER, POLICE COULD ARREST THEM.

THEY PILED IT IN A BIG PACKAGE, PUT A BOW ON IT AND PUT IT IN PRELIMINARY APPROVAL IN THE SENATE.

TED: JIM, THIS IS MODELED AFTER IN GREAT PART, THE TEXAS LAW, WHICH WAS MODELED AFTER IN GREAT PART SB 1070, CORRECT?

>> IN SOME WAYS.

THE SENATE LAW GOES FARTHER THAN THE TEXAS LAW AND CREATES A DUPLICATIVE STATE IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM.

YES, IT WOULD ALLOW POLICE TO ARREST FOLKS THEY THINK ARE HERE, THEY THINK THEY CAN PROVE ARE HERE IN THE COUNTRY UNDOCUMENTED.

BUT IT ALSO ALLOWS ARIZONA JUDGES TO ISSUE DEPORTATION ISSUES, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT IS AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN PURELY THE REALM OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

THAT'S THE ARGUMENT AGAINST THE TEXAS LAW THAT'S HUNG UP IN THE COURTS RIGHT NOW.

THE FIFTH CIRCUIT APPELLATE COURT AND THE ARGUMENT IS LIKE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE DOME AVENT FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, UPHELD BY THE COURT, THE U.S. SUPREME COURT IN RESPONSE TO SB 1070 WHEN THEY STRUCK DOWN THREE OF THE FOUR PROVISIONS OF THAT LAW.

THE IDEA IS FROM CONSERVATIVES, IS TO TRY TO GET A NEW SUPREME COURT, ONE THAT THEY THINK IS GOING TO BE MUCH MORE IDEOLOGICALLY IN LINE WITH WHAT THEY WANT TO DO AND THROW IT OUT THE WINDOW AND SAY IT'S OKAY, STATES CAN ENFORCE IMMIGRATION.

TED: COULD BE A LOT OF RAMIFICATIONS HERE, RESPONSE FROM THE GOVERNOR, RESPONSE FROM DEMOCRATS.

>> THE GOVERNOR IS NOT HAPPY ABOUT IT.

THIS IS ALL TO GET AROUND HER, THIS IS A MEASURE THAT WOULD GO TO THE BALLOTS.

FOR VOTERS TO DECIDE ON DIRECTLY AND YOU DON'T HAVE THE DANGER OF IT BEING VETOED BY THE GOVERNOR WHO VETOED MOST OF IT ALREADY.

SHE SAID THIS IS NOT THE SOLUTION, NOT SOMETHING I SUPPORT AND HOPING THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY WILL STOP IT AND RUN A CAMPAIGN AGAINST IT TO TRY TO CONVINCE VOTERS THIS IS NOT THE WAY.

TED: HOWIE, YOU REFERRED TO, THIS THERE'S A LOT OF ASPECTS THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS THING.

>> CONCERNED ABOUT SOME OF IT.

THEY DID GUT SOME OF THE PROVISIONS THAT WOULD ALLOW THE $10,000 A DAY FINES BUT WHAT THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY IS REALIZING, LOOK AT THE PUBLICITY ARIZONA TOOK WITH SENATE BILL 1070.

LOOK AT THE VISITORS THAT CANCELED, LOOK AT THE PEOPLE THAT ENDED UP ON THE DAILY SHOW ON A REGULAR BASIS.

IF IT DOESN'T AFFECT BUSINESS DIRECTLY, WE HAVE AN INTEREST IN NOT DOING THIS AGAIN.

PLUS THE FACT THERE WILL BE ANOTHER CHALLENGE, LEAVING ASIDE THE TEXAS BILL IT'S MODELED AFTER IS CHALLENGED THERE, THERE ARE PROVISIONS IN THIS BILL THAT ARE SEPARATELY CHALLENGED.

FOR EXAMPLE, YOU ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE LAW IF YOU ARE HERE AND HAVE BEEN GRANTED ASYLUM, BUT IF YOU APPLIED FOR ASYLUM, WHICH UNDER FEDERAL LAW ALLOWS YOU TO STAY, THIS ALLOWS A STATE POLICE OFFICER TO ARREST YOU AND A STATE JUDGE TO DEPORT YOU.

TED: AND JIM, IF THIS GETS ONTO THE BALLOT, WHAT DOES THIS DO TO THE BALLOT AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS ON THE BALLOT?

>> WELL, IT DEFINITELY WOULD GIVE -- I THINK RIGHT NOW REPUBLICANS ARE LOOKING AT THE BALLOT, AND PARTICULARLY THE BALLOT MEASURES, AREN'T SEEING A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO ABSOLUTELY DRIVE TURNOUT FOR THE REPUBLICAN SIDE.

AND I THINK THERE IS CERTAINLY A THOUGHT THIS COULD BE THAT.

SOMETHING TO COUNTER THE -- FOR INSTANCE, THE BOERGDZ RIGHTS INITIATIVE, RIGHT, WHICH IS EXPECTED TO DRIVE TURNOUT FOR DEMOCRATS AND LIBERALS THAT THIS MIGHT DO SOMETHING OF THE SAME THING FOR REPUBLICANS AND CONSERVATIVES.

YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO BE INTERESTING IF THIS DOES GET ON THE BALLOT.

I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE -- INTERESTING TO SEE WHO COMES BEHIND IT, WHO WOULD THROW MONEY BEHIND THIS CAMPAIGN.

CERTAINLY A LOT OF MONEY OPPOSED TO IT, WHETHER ANY OF THE MESSAGES ARE GOING TO GET THROUGH WHAT'S A CROWDED ELECTION SEASON AND AIR WAVES ARE FULL TO THE BRIM WITH POLITICAL ADS, I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE TOUGH CUT THROUGH THE NOISE.

TED: CAMRYN, DOES THIS MOVE IMMIGRATION UP TO EQUAL, PERHAPS EVEN SURPASS ABORTION AS THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE ON THE BALLOT THIS NOVEMBER?

>> THAT MIGHT BE THE GOAL, BUT I THINK ABORTION IS A LITTLE ABOVE IT.

I THINK IT COULD HAVE THE RESULT OF BRINGING OUT SOME CONSERVATIVE TURNOUT, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S QUITE PROPORTIONAL.

GOING BACK TO THE OPPOSITION, DEMOCRATS ARE ARGUING THAT THE LAW SAYS THE SAME THING, YOU HAVE TO SEE SOMEONE CROSS THE BORDER WITH YOUR OWN EYES, WHAT IF THERE IS RACIAL PROFILING NOT EVEN IN BORDER COUNTIES, IF LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SAYS WE THINK THIS PERSON CROSSED THE BORDER ILLEGALLY JUST BASED ON APPEARANCE, THE REPUBLICANS SAY THAT'S RIDICULOUS, NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN AND NOT PRO-RACIAL PROFILING AND JUST A DEMOCRAT SCARE TACTIC.

>> GETTING BACK TO THE POLITICAL SIDE OF THIS.

THIS IS THE LAST OF WHAT REPUBLICANS WANT TO THROW ON THE BALLOT.

THEY'RE GOING TO RESURRECT SOME OF THE GOVERNOR'S VETOED ELECTION BILLS NEXT WEEK AND TRY TO PUT THEM INTO A PACKAGE, THINGS LIKE VOTER I.D.

AND GETTING READY OF EARLY BALLOTING AND EVERYTHING ELSE, WHICH TENDS TO BRING OUT A CERTAIN CONTINGENT THERE.

TED: HOWIE, AT WHAT POINT DOES THE BALLOT BECOME A RUSSIAN NOVEL AND A PERSON SAYS I'M GOING TO CHOOSE THE FIRST FIVE THINGS I SEE AND GO GET LUNCH.

>> THE GOOD NEWS FOR THE ABORTION FOLKS, THE BALLOT MEASURE STARTS IN THE 100 NUMBERS, THIS STUFF WOULD BE FURTHER DOWN THERE.

WE TALKED ABOUT A LOT OF THAT ON THE SHOW AND THE QUESTION IS AT WHAT POINT DO THEY SAY WHAT THE HECK?

THERE'S ANOTHER PIECE TO THAT, THOUGH, AND YEARS AGO I WORKED ON A BALLOT MEASURE, WHEN PEOPLE ARE CONFUSED, THEY VOTE NO.

>> THE MORE YOU GOT ON THERE, THE MORE NO VOTES YOU GET, CORRECT?

>> CONSPIRACY THEORY IS PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE INTERESTED IN THE BALLOT MEASURES EVEN IF THEY'RE AT THE BOTTOM.

AND IF PEOPLE SKIP THE JUDGES, WHO NO OFFENSE ARE A YAWN, THE BORDER AND ABORTION, PEOPLE WILL VOTE ON THEM.

TED: MAYBE GO STRAIGHT TO THEM AND FILL OUT THE REST OF THE BALLOT AS THEY SEE FIT, RIGHT?

>> SURE.

TED: JIM, A STUDY ON SCHOOL VOUCHERS THAT SHOWED THAT, SURPRISE, THEY SEEM TO BE GOING DISPROPORTIONATELY TO VERY WEALTHY FAMILIES IN VERY WEALTHY AREAS.

THIS IS THE BROOKING INSTITUTE.

TALK TO US MORE ABOUT THE STUDY.

>> YEAH, AND YOUR SARCASM, JUST TO BE PERFECTLY CLEAR, I DON'T THINK THIS IS A SURPRISE TO ANYONE FOLLOWING THIS DEBATE.

THIS IS WHAT WAS PREDICTED WAS GOING TO HAPPEN, WHEN YOU MADE THIS PROGRAM THAT WAS CRAFTED INITIALLY TO GO TO STUDENTS IN UNDERSERVED SCHOOLS, TO STUDENTS WHO ARE STUDENTS IN FAILING SCHOOLS, FOLKS IN LOW-INCOME AREAS, THEY EXPANDED IT TO EVERYBODY IN THE STATE.

THERE WAS OBVIOUSLY A VERY LARGE APPETITE FOR THIS PROGRAM, AND IT WAS CLEAR, I THINK, VERY EARLY ON, ONCE THE UNIVERSAL APPLICATIONS OPENED THAT A LOT OF THE NEW APPLICANTS WERE COMING FROM WEALTHIER AREAS AND WERE COMING -- A LOT OF THEM WERE STUDENTS WHO NEVER STEPPED FOOT IN A PUBLIC SCHOOL.

AS OPPOSED TO STUDENTS WHO ARE LEAVING A FAILING PUBLIC SCHOOL TO GO PRIVATE SCHOOL OR HOME-SCHOOLED, THESE ARE STUDENTS WHO HAD NEVER BEEN IN A PUBLIC SCHOOL, WHICH I THINK THE OBVIOUS IMPLICATION IS YOU HAD A LOT OF EXISTING PRIVATE SCHOOL STUDENTS, FOLKS WHOSE FAMILIES HAVE THE MEANS TO SEND CHILDREN TO PRIVATE SCHOOLS WHO ARE GETTING SUBSIDIZED BY THE STATE TO DO THIS.

TED: THAT'S THE POINT.

IF YOU COULD AFFORD TO SEND YOUR KIDS TO BROPHY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT OR THE ONE OF THE MORE EXPENSIVE SCHOOLS, HERE'S $7300 BASE IF YOU HAVE CERTAIN NEEDS, AND WE'RE GOING TO GIVE IT TO YOU AND YOU COULD USE IT FOR THAT.

AND IT'S MORE COMPLEX THAN THAT.

IT EVEN ALLOWS PARENTS WHO DO HOME-SCHOOLING TO SET THE MONEY ASIDE AND USE IT NOT ONLY FOR UNUSUAL EXPENSES, TALKED ABOUT THE GRAND PIANOS AND EVERYTHING ELSE, BUT USE IT FOR COLLEGE.

PEOPLE WHO ARE POOR ARE NOT PUTTING THE MONEY ASIDE FOR COLLEGE.

THE FOLKS AT THE TOP END OF THE SCALE.

TED: CAMRYN, TALKING ABOUT HIGHEST MEDIAN INCOMES, LOWEST POVERTY RATES.

IS THAT WHERE THE MONEY WAS INTENDED TO GO?

ORIGINALLY, WHEN THIS STARTED IN THE DISTANT PAST THEY WERE VERY TARGETED STUDENTS AND FAMILIES.

OBVIOUSLY THE TARGET IS GONE.

ISN'T THIS WHAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT?

>> I DON'T THINK YOU'LL HEAR THE PROPONENTS SAY THEY MADE A MISTAKE AND THAT THIS IS NOT WHAT THEY INTENDED.

WHAT I RECALL IS YES, IT WAS SUPPOSED TO SAVE THE PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS ESCAPE FROM FAILING SYSTEM AND THIS WAS GOING TO BE THE LIFELINE AND WE HAVE TO STAND BY THEM.

IN REALITY, PRETTY MUCH THE WHOLE TIME SINCE EXPANSION STARTED, WE'VE HAD DISPROPORTIONATE NUMBER OF PRIVATE SCHOOL STUDENTS, WEALTHIER STUDENTS.

I WOULD SAY THIS IS A CONTINUING WAY OF WHAT WE'VE ALREADY KNOWN.

THE PEOPLE WHO HELPED PASS THE EXPANSION, I THINK THEY'RE STAUNCHLY FOCUSED ON SAYING THIS IS A GOOD THING.

THIS IS A SUCCESS.

THE MORE STUDENTS THE BETTER.

>> LET ME GO A STEP BEYOND THAT.

THIS IS BACK UNDER JAN BREWER, SPECIFICALLY MEANT FOR STUDENTS WHO COULD NOT GET THE SPECIFIC NEEDS MET IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS, A SPECIFIC DISABILITY, LEARNING DISABILITY.

THEY SAID AT THE TIME, AND I'VE GOT THE NEWS STORIES, THIS IS THE FOOT IN THE DOOR.

THEY KNEW THEY WERE GOING TO DO THAT.

TED: AND YET AT THE SAME TIME, I WAS DOING SHOWS ON THIS, THEY SAID DON'T WORRY ABOUT THIS.

THIS IS A TARGETED AUDIENCE, A LOT OF ALARM.

HOWIE, OVER THE YEARS, JIM, YOU REMEMBER, OVER THE YEARS, THIS HAS DONE WHAT THE CRITICS SAID IT WOULD ORIGINALLY DO.

>> THIS WAS DESIGNED TO BE THE CAMEL'S NOSE UNDER THE TENT, WHEN THEY PASSED THIS FOR DISABLED STUDENTS, THE GOAL WAS TO GET THE CHALLENGE IN COURT AND GET THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT TO SAY THIS STRUCTURE IS FINE.

YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THIS COMES AFTER SEVERAL OTHER VERSIONS OF VOUCHER PROGRAMS WERE STRUCK DOWN BY THE COURTS FOR IMPERMISABLY SPENDING TAXPAYER DOLLARS ON RELIGIOUS AND PAROCHIAL EDUCATION, THE WORK-AROUND WAS TO TAKE THE MONEY, PUT IT INTO ACCOUNT AND LET THE PARENTS DIRECT WHERE THAT SPENDING GOES, INSTEAD OF ACTUALLY -- INSTEAD OF THE MONEY GOING TO THE STATE TREASURY TO A BROPHY, TO AN XAVIER, TO A RELIGIOUS PRIVATE SCHOOL.

IT PUTS IT IN THE HANDS OF THE PARENTS, LETS THE PARENTS CHOOSE AND THAT WORKS FINE, ONCE THEY GOT THE GREEN LIGHT, IT WAS ALWAYS A RACE TO SEE HOW FAST THEY COULD OPEN UP THE PROGRAM AND HOW QUICKLY THEY COULD EXPAND IT TO WHERE WE ARE NOW, WHICH IS EVERY STUDENT IN THE STATE.

TED: CAMRYN, DOES IT DO ANYTHING TO THE DEBATE OVER AT THE CAPITOL OVER ESAs, HAS THE HORSE LEFT THE BARN UNTIL SOMETHING BIG HAPPENS AS FAR AS LEGISLATURE IS CONCERNED?

>> AS LONG AS WE HAVE THE REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE NOTHING IS GOING TO CHANGE FROM THE REPORT.

THE REPUBLICANS HAVE THE SAME TALKING POINTS AND DEMOCRATS HAVE THE SAME TALKING POINTS.

I AGREE WITH JIM, UNDER BREWER, WE HAVE A TENT FULL OF RICH CAMELS FROM PARADISE VALLEY.

AND THE DEMOCRATS SAY IF WE DON'T KILL THE PROGRAM, PUT A CAP ON THE AMOUNT OF MONEY AND/OR THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS AND MAYBE IF THE DEMS GET CONTROL OF ANOTHER CHAMBER OR SOMETHING, THAT'S THE NEXT STEP.

IF NOT LIKE GETTING RID OF IT COMPLETELY.

>> DEMOCRATS COULD GAIN CONTROL IF NOT ONE BUT BOTH.

IF THAT HAPPENS, DOES IT GO KABLOOEY.

>> NO, IT DOESN'T GO KABLOOEY.

THE GOVERNOR SAID I WANT TO ROLL BACK TO WHERE WE WERE, SHE RECOGNIZES THERE ARE LEGITIMATE REASONS FOR VOUCHERS QUOTE, UNQUOTE EMPOWERMENT SCHOLARSHIP ACCOUNTS, SCHOOLS RATED D OR F, GOT EXPANDED INTO FOSTER CARE CHILDREN, ANY CHILD UNDER RESERVATIONAL LAW, I'M NOT SURE WHAT IT MEANS ON CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS BUT IT HAS BEEN EXPANDED BIT BY BIT, YOU COULD ROLL IT BACK OR TAKE IT AND HAVE IT MEANS TESTED, THAT WOULD CHANGE A LOT.

TED: YEAH, YEAH, CAMRYN WE HAD A BROADCAST STUDIO INCIDENT INVOLVING ANTHONY KERN, USED EQUIPMENT TO DO WHAT?

>> TO PUSH PEDOPHILIA.

SENATOR KERN IS IN THE FREEDOM CAUCUS, FAR TO THE RIGHT.

DEMOCRATS A COUPLE WEEKS AGO HAD THIS EVENT IN THE BASEMENT OF THE HOUSE WHERE THEY HAD A DRAG KING READ THEM A STORYBOOK, WHICH IS FUNNY, A GROUP OF ADULTS LISTENING TO ANOTHER ADULT AT 9:00 ON A WORKDAY READS THE STORY.

REPUBLICANS WERE UPSET ABOUT IT AND SAID THE STORY IN PARTICULAR AND THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A DRAG KING AT THE STATEHOUSE WAS OFFENSIVE AND PUSHING PEDOPHILIA, DANGEROUS FOR OUR CHILDREN.

ANTHONY KERN USED SENATE RESOURCES TO GO ONTO A SHOW AND TALK ABOUT THAT, BUT THEN HE GOT BLOWBACK AND IS NO LONGER ALLOWED TO DO THAT ANYMORE.

TED: JIM, HE'S NO LONGER ALLOWED BECAUSE THE SHOW WAS CURIOUS AT BEST.

>> SURE, THAT'S ONE WORD FOR IT.

HE WENT ON A TALK SHOW OF A FAR RIGHT HOST WHO HAS BEEN PEDDLING CONSPIRACY THEORIES OF ALL STRIPES FOR FOUR OR FIVE YEARS, AND RECENTLY IN THE LAST SIX OR EIGHT MONTHS, THE HOST HAS VEERED INTO PRETTY NAKED ANTI-SEMITISM.

OPENLY PRAISING ADOLF HITLER, TALKING ABOUT HOW THE NAZIS DID THE RIGHT THING, ABOUT HOW BURNING BOOKS IS THE FIRST STEP TO RECLAIMING OUR NATION.

ALL KINDS OF STUFF THAT IS COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE BY THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE, AND THIS IS THE PERSON THAT ANTHONY KERN USED, WENT ONTO A SHOW TO TALK ABOUT THIS STUFF WITH, AND WHEN WE WERE THE FIRST ONES TO REPORT ABOUT IT, AND WHEN WE DID, IT DIDN'T TAKE LONG FOR THE SENATE TO STEP IN AND SAY THAT'S IT.

SENATOR KERN, YOU'RE DONE USING OUR EQUIPMENT.

I THINK THEY RECOGNIZED HOW POLITICALLY UNTENABLE THAT SITUATION WAS.

>> WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS, LOOK, IF YOU'RE A POLITICIAN AND ASKED TO GO ON A SHOW OF SOMEBODY YOU DIDN'T HEAR ABOUT, IF YOU GO ON KJZZ, YOU KNOW WHO THEY ARE, YOU KNOW WHO CAMRYN IS.

IF YOU TALK TO THE MIRROR, YOU KNOW WHO I AM.

IF YOU DO A GOOGLE SEARCH, THROW THERE GUY'S NAME IN, WHEN YOU SEE SOMETHING ABOUT PRAISING HITLER, LITTLE ALARM SHOULD GO OFF IN YOUR HEAD, AND YET THEY DIDN'T DO THAT.

TED: SOUNDS AS LOW, AND JIM, BACK TO YOU, SOUNDS AS THOUGH THE PODCASTERS WONDERED ALLOWED THAT SPEAKER TOMA WAS A PEDOPHILE?

IS THAT VIEW IN.

>> YEAH, HE BASICALLY SAID FINISHES THIS IS HAPPENING IN THE HOUSE, IT'S ONLY BECAUSE THE HOUSE SPEAKER, WHO BY THE WAY, BEN TOMA IS ANTHONY KERN'S OPPONENT IN THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARY CONGRESS.

IF THIS IS HAPPENING, IT HAS TO BE BECAUSE HE'S A PEDOPHILE AND A GROOMER AND HE IS ALL OF THESE TERRIBLE THINGS AND ANTHONY KERN SMILED AND NODDED ALONG AND DIDN'T PUSH BACK, DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING, YOU KNOW?

HE CERTAINLY DIDN'T ENGAGE IN IT BUT ABSOLUTELY LISTENED.

>> SENATE PRESIDENT WARREN PETERSEN, CAMRYN, NOT AMUSED.

>> NOPE, THEY DIDN'T MAKE A WHOLE BIG TO DO ABOUT IT, DIDN'T HAVE A PRESS CONFERENCE AND KERN DIDN'T HAVE MUCH OF A RESPONSE, SAID HE HE'S THE SENATE PRESIDENT, HE CAN DO THAT.

AND THAT WAS THE END OF IT.

>> WHAT'S INTERESTING, WE TRIED TO GET A CLEAR STATEMENT FROM THE SENATE PRESIDENT.

WAS IT BECAUSE WHO HE WAS BEING INTERVIEWED BY?

THIS SORT OF NEO-NAZI OR WHAT HE SAID OR CEDED TO.

THERE ARE PLENTY OF REMOTE STUDIOS AROUND TOWN YOU CAN USE.

YOU ARE GOING TO BE ON CNN, YOU GO TO THE STUDIO ON 48th STREET.

IF YOU USE PUBLIC FACILITIES, YOU BETTER TOE THE LINE.

TED: LAST POINT ON THIS, PETERSEN TAKING KERN AWAY FROM THE STUDIO.

STILL ON THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE?

>> THEY'RE NOT MEETING ANYMORE SO IT'S IMMATERIAL.

BUT HE DID NOT TAKE AWAY CHAIRMANSHIP FROM HIM.

TED: YOU COULD MAKE A STATEMENT, MAYBE NOT, WHO KNOWS.

>>> LET'S GET GOING HERE, CAMRYN, HOUSING BILLS, SOUNDS LIKE THREE BILLS ADVANCING HERE.

TWO BILLS ADVANCING.

ONE BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

THERE WAS TOUGH GUY TALK IN BETWEEN HERE.

WHAT'S GOING ON?

>> YES, YES, THAT IS CORRECT.

HOUSING HAS BEEN A MESS FOR THE PAST YEAR, THEY HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING SUBSTANTIAL AND EVERYONE AGREES WE NEED MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

SO ON WEDNESDAY OF THIS WEEK, THERE WERE THREE BILLS IN THE SENATE, AND ONE OF THEM WAS AMENDED TO INCLUDE ELEMENTS OF A BILL THAT HAD BEEN VETOED BY HOBBS CALLED THE STARTER HOMES ACT EARLIER IN THE SESSION, AND ALSO LEGISLATION THAT TRIED TO GET BY TWO YEARS AGO WHEN THERE WAS A GUY STEVE KAISER IN THE LEG.

SENATOR JAKE HOFFMAN ADDED ON LEGISLATION THAT HAD DIED ALREADY BECAUSE THE BILL HAD WOUND THROUGH HIS COMMITTEE, AND HE CLAIMS THAT THE BILL'S SPONSOR WAS LYING TO HIM BY ADDING STUFF AFTER IT PASSED OUT OF HIS COMMITTEE, AND THE BILL ENDED UP DYING 14-14.

BARELY DIED, IT DIED NONETHELESS, AND THERE WAS SNIPING BACK AND FORTH WITH HOFFMAN AND SENATOR SONNY BORRELLI, THE SEAT MATE OF THE BILL'S SPONSOR AND SAID CALM DOWN, BUDDY.

TED: AND JIM, WE HAD TOUGH TALK AT THE LEGISLATURE.

>> YEAH, VERY POINTED WORDS.

YOU KNOW.

AND POINTED BETWEEN PEOPLE WHO ARE LARGELY ALLIES, AND I THINK ON JUST ABOUT EVERY ISSUE YOU WOULD FIND SENATOR BORRELLI AND SENATOR HOFFMAN AGREEING WITH EACH OTHER.

THIS ONE, THEY OBVIOUSLY HAD SOMETHING OF A FALLING OUT, AND IT LED TO KIND OF TENSION, PRETTY PALPABLE TENSION ON THE SENATE FLOOR.

TED: THE QUOTE, HOWIE WAS, YOU BETTER CHECK YOURSELF.

>> THAT WAS PROBABLY ONE OF THE NICEST THINGS THEY WHISPERED TO EACH OTHER.

WHAT IS MOVING?

ONE OF THE BILLS IS MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING.

IT SAYS IN CERTAIN AREAS OF CITIES OVER 75,000 WHERE IT'S KNOWN FOR SINGLE FAMILY, CAN YOU DO DUPLEXES, TOWNHOUSES, DO THEM IN AREAS WHERE THERE IS TEN ACRES.

THE OTHER IS CASITAS OR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS.

THESE ARE MOTHER-IN-LAW COTTAGES.

IF YOU CONSTRUCT THOSE AS MORE HOUSING.

THE FIGHT AND THE REASON IT STUCK IS THE CITIES ARE SAYING, GREAT, WE'LL LET YOU PUSH A BILL THAT SAYS YOU CAN HAVE TWO IN YOUR YARD, BUT SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO USE THEM FOR AirBNB AND OTHER VACATION HOUSING, BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT SOLVING THE PROBLEM.

SOME OF THE REPUBLICANS SAY, WAIT, THIS IS PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS, BUT IF YOU PUT IN A PUNCH OF AirBNBS, YOU HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING TO MAKE MORE HOMES AFFORDABLE.

TED: THE CITIES AND TOWNS NOT ENAMORED BY MUCH OF THIS BUT OKAY WITH SOME OF THIS?

HOW IS THAT WORKING?

>> OPPOSED THE BILL THAT DIED AND OPPOSED THE AID AMENDED ONTO IT.

THEY ARE OKAY WITH THE MISSING MIDDLE PART, THE FOURPLEXES, THE DUPLEXES, WHATEVER.

THOSE BILLS ARE NOT AS SUBSTANTIAL AS WHAT HAS DIED IN THE PAST.

THE STARTER HOMESAGE.

SENATOR KAISER'S BILLS, THAT'S ABOUT ZONING REFORM, AND I EXPECT THAT WILL KEEP COMING BACK, THOSE CONCEPTS, AND THAT IS THE THING THE LEAGUE IS MOST OPPOSED TO, MOST ADAMANTLY AGAINST.

IT IS A VERY INTERESTING VOTE, A BIPARTISAN VOTE BUT BIPARTISAN OPPOSITION, AND YOU HAVE THE STRANGE THE COALITION OF SENATORS OPPOSING IT.

JAKE HOFFMAN, SENATOR MENDEZ, SENATOR MARSH WHO ARE DEMOCRATS AND SENATOR MENDEZ IS FAR TO THE LEFT.

YOU'VE GOT PEOPLE AGREEING WITH IT FOR VERY DIFFERENT REASONS.

>> AND THE OTHER SIDE IS YOU HAVE ANA LEASE ORTIZ WHO SAID, LOOK, I'D LIKE TO OWN A HOME SOMEDAY, GIVEN THE MEDIAN PRICE IN PHOENIX IS 400,000+, YOU HAVE A DUPLEX OR TRIPLEX, I HAVE A CHANCE OF HAVING HOME OWNERSHIP AND UNITING WITH THE CITIES AND THOSE WHO WANT THE REGULATIONS.

>> JIM, IF THE ZONING STAYS AWAY, IS THE GOVERNOR LIKELY TO SIGN?

>> I THINK FAR MORE LIKELY.

SHE'S DEMONSTRATED IN THE PAST SHE LISTENS CLOSELY TO WHAT THE CITIES AND TOWNS ARE SAYING ABOUT SOMETHING, AND, YOU KNOW, FOR MUNICIPAL LEADERS, ZONING IS REALLY KIND OF LIKE THE WHOLE KINGDOM.

THAT IS HOW CITIES DETERMINE WHAT THE CITY IS GOING TO BE LIKE AND WHO CAN LIVE WHERE AND HOW THESE THINGS WORK?

AND THAT IS THE THING THAT THEY CAN DO MOST DIRECTLY, AND SO ANY, ANYTHING THAT THREATENS THAT IS SEEN AS AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT FOR A LOT OF CITIES.

SO IF THEY'RE ON BOARD WITH SOMETHING OR THE LEAGUE OF ARIZONA CITIES AND TOWNS IS NEUTRAL ON SOMETHING, THAT IS PROBABLY A REALLY GOOD SIGN IT WILL FIND APPROVAL IN THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE.

TED: ALL RIGHT, HOWIE, THE ALLIANCE DEFENDING FREEDOM, WHO ARE THEY AND WHY DO THEY WANT THE 1864 BAN THAT THE SUPREME COURT REVIVED REGARDING ABORTION, WHY ARE THEY SAYING KNOCK IT OFF WITH THE DELAY?

>> IT IS A SCOTTSDALE-BASED CHRISTIAN LAW FIRM, FORMED FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFENDING FAMILY VALUES.

FOR ANTI-GAY RIGHTS LEGISLATION AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

IN THIS CASE, THEY'RE DEFENDING A DOCTOR APPOINTED BY THE COURTS TO REPRESENT THE INTEREST OF UNBORN CHILDREN IN THE FIGHT OVER THE 1864 LAW VERSUS THE 15-WEEK LAW.

WE'VE BEEN THREW AND DON'T NEED TO REVISIT ALL THAT.

SUPREME COURT, AS WE KNOW, SAID THE 1864 LAW TRUMPS THE NEWER LAW BECAUSE THEY NEVER REPEALED THE OLD LAW, AND SO NOW THE FIGHT IS OVER WHEN THE COURT ISSUES ITS MANDATE?

WHEN DOES THAT TAKE EFFECT?

NOW THE ARGUMENT IS, WELL, WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE LEGISLATION DID REPEAL THE 1864 LAW, WHICH WILL TAKE EFFECT 91 DAYS AFTER THE FOOLS GO HOME, WHICH COULD BE SEPTEMBER OR OCTOBER WITH THE 91-DAY LIMIT.

FIGHT IS SHOULD WE ALLOW THE LAW TO TAKE EFFECT FOR A PERIOD OF TIME, BECAUSE RIGHT AT THE MOMENT WE'RE AT 15 WEEKS AND CUT OFF ABORTIONS FOR A PERIOD, OR AS WAS ARGUED BY PLANNED PARENTHOOD AND ATTORNEY GENERAL KRIS MAYES, LOOK, IT'S GOING TO GO AWAY, WHY GO AHEAD AND CREATE THIS BLACKOUT PERIOD?

TED: YEAH, I THINK THE POINT AMONG SOME FOLKS IS THE LEGISLATURE MADE ITS INTENT AND INTENDED FOR IT TO GO AWAY, WHY WOULD YOU GO AHEAD AND ALLOW IT TO BE IN EFFECT FOR ANY STRETCH OF TIME?

GIVEN THE FACT HOWIE LAID OUT THE NUMBERS AND THE DATES, WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT ANYWAY?

>> WE'VE GOT A RATS NEST OF DEADLINES TO DEAL WITH.

OF COURSE, THE PROPONENTS OF THAT REPEAL, THE PRO-ABORTION PEOPLE SAID THE LEG SAID NO, NEVER LET IT GO INTO EFFECT EVER.

THE COURT RULED THE 1864 LAW IS IN EFFECT.

IS THERE A BLACKOUT PERIOD OR NOT?

WE'VE GOT PEOPLE LOBBYING THE COURT PUT IT IN.

TED: WE'VE GOT TO STOP IT RIGHT THERE.

PANEL, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THAT'S IT FOR NOW.

I'M TED SIMONS.

THANK YOU FOR JOINING US, YOU HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND.