♪.

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

WE'LL LOOK AT THE WEEK'S TOP STORIES, INCLUDING STATE DEMOCRATS FILING SUIT OVER THE ARIZONA INDEPENDENT PARTY'S NAME CHANGE.

THE JOURNALISTS' ROUNDTABLE IS NEXT ON "ARIZONA HORIZON."

GOOD EVENING, AND WELCOME TO "ARIZONA HORIZON."

I'M TED SIMONS.

IT'S FRIDAY, AND THAT MEANS IT'S TIME FOR THE JOURNALISTS' ROUNDTABLE.

AND JOINING US TONIGHT, WAYNE SCHUTSKY FROM KJZZ RADIO, JESSICA BOEHM AND DENNIS WELCH FROM CBS 5 AND 3TV.

NO ONE LIKES THE NAME CHANGE WITH THE ARIZONA INDEPENDENT PARTY.

DEMS SAYING IT'S TOO CONFUSING, GOING TO HURT OUR CAUSE.

ALL OF THE ABOVE?

>> MAKING A SIMILAR CONNECTION, VOTERS WHO DON'T WANT TO BE AFFILIATED WITH ANY PARTY COULD BE CONFUSED IF THEY SEE ARIZONA INDEPENDENT PARTY ON REGISTRATION, PEOPLE MIGHT REGISTER FOR THAT INSTEAD OF GOING FOR THE PARTY THEY WANT, THAT COULD AFFECT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY BECAUSE THE LOWER CASE INDEPENDENT VOTERS CAN DO THINGS LIKE CHOOSE A BALLOT TO VOTE FOR, FOR EITHER THE REPUBLICANS OR DEMOCRATS.

NOW THEY CAN'T PARTICIPATE THERE, CAN'T SIGN THE PETITION FOR DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE ON THE BALLOT IF THEY ARE REGISTERED WITH OFFICIAL PARTY.

>> THE PARTY NOW IS AN OFFICIAL PARTY, AND THAT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE?

>> IT DOES.

AND THE OTHER THING THAT I DON'T THINK DEMOCRATS ARE LIKE OPENLY ANNOUNCING, BUT ANOTHER ISSUE WITH THIS FOR THE DEMOCRATS IS THAT AS THIS PARTY -- THIS NEW PARTY IS ABLE TO GET CANDIDATES ON THE BALLOT MUCH MORE EASILY, AND BY DOING SO, PRESENTS ADDITIONAL COMPETITION IN RACES THAT DEMOCRATS HOPE TO WIN.

THAT'S THE UNSAID PART.

>> TRANSLATE THAT A LITTLE MORE.

DEMOCRATS FILING SUIT OVER THIS.

THERE'S A BIG DEMOCRAT UP FOR RE-ELECTION NEXT YEAR, IT'S THE GOVERNOR, RIGHT?

IF THERE IS AN INDEPENDENT PARTY CANDIDATE, I HAVE HEARD DEMOCRATS TELL ME, THERE IS CONCERN THEY WOULD TAKE WAY, VOTES FROM KATIE HOBBS IN THE PIVOTAL ELECTION YEAR.

THAT IS BEHIND A LOT WHAT'S GOING ON HERE.

IF YOU TALK TO VOTERS, THEY LIKE THE IDEA OF BEING INDEPENDENT VOTER, THAT'S WHY THERE ARE SO MANY VOTERS THAT ARE NOT PARTY DESIGNATED AND MIGHT NOT LIKE THE DEMOCRAT AND REPUBLICAN ON THE BALLOT THIS YEAR.

TYPICALLY WE SEE IN ELECTION CYCLE AFTER ELECTION CYCLE, THEY DON'T LIKE CHOICES SO THEY MIGHT GO WITH THE THIRD AND LIKE THE IDEA OF THE INDEPENDENT PARTY CANDIDATE.

TED: THE IDEA, YOU HAVE TO WRITE DOWN INDEPENDENT WITHOUT INDEPENDENT PARTY TO BE A TRUE INDEPENDENT, TRUE?

>> LET ME TRY AND UNTANGLE SOME OF THAT.

A LOT OF CONFUSION WHAT THE VOTER REGISTRATION FORMS WILL SAY.

WHAT YOU'RE REFERENCING IS THE SECRETARY OF STATE IS STARTING TO COMMUNICATE WITH COUNTIES HOW THIS WILL GO ON VOTER REGISTRATION FORMS AND THAT'S EXACTLY THE SOURCE OF THE CONFUSION.

YOU KNOW, I THINK THE ATTORNEY FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY BASICALLY SAID SOMEONE'S VOTER REGISTRATION CAN HINGE ON ONE WORD, WHETHER IT SAYS INDEPENDENT OR INDEPENDENT PARTY, WHY MAKE THIS CONFUSION, THE CHAIR OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY SAID IF THIS IS ABOUT THE NAME, IF THEY WANTED TO CALL THEMSELVES SOMETHING ELSE THAT WASN'T SO CONFUSING BESIDE NO LABEL.

THIS SPECIFICALLY IS DESIGNED TO CONFUSE PEOPLE IS THE GENERAL ARGUMENT.

TED: NOT ONLY THAT, BUT THERE'S A CLAIM THAT ADRIAN FONTES, SECRETARY OF STATE, DIDN'T HAVE THE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO GIVE THE GO-AHEAD.

>> YEAH, I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHETHER THAT'S TRUE OR NOT.

THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, BUT THE POINT IS THAT HE IS SAYING, WELL, I'M SECRETARY OF STATE, I HAVE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS TO ALLOW THESE THINGS TO OCCUR.

HE'S SAYING HE'S WORKING AGAIN WITH THE COUNTIES TO BE ABLE TO SOMEHOW FIND A WAY TO COMMUNICATE THIS TO FOLKS SO THEY UNDERSTAND WHETHER THEY'RE INDEPENDENT OR THEY ARE A MEMBER OF THE INDEPENDENT PARTY.

TED: WE SHOULD MENTION CLEAN ELECTIONS ALSO ARGUED THAT FONTES, SECRETARY FONTES, DOESN'T HAVE THE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO MAKE THIS KIND OF A CHANGE.

>> AGAIN, I'M GOING AGREE WITH JESSICA, I'M NOT SURE WHETHER HE DOES OR DOESN'T.

IF YOU TALK TO ADRIAN FONTES, HE'LL TELL YOU SURE I DO.

I HAVE ALL THE AUTHORITY IN THE WORLD DO.

THAT'S WHAT HE'S BEEN SAYING AND MOVING FORWARD, IT SEEMS LIKE IT IS PRESENTED A BIG PROBLEM FOR DEMOCRATS RIGHT NOW OR VERY MUCH, VERY CONCERNED HOW THIS COULD DISRUPT CERTAIN ELECTIONS OUT THERE.

I WILL ALSO SAY THIS, IT CAN WORK BOTH WAYS.

THROW AN INDEPENDENT PARTY DOWN IN JUAN CISCOMANI'S RE-ELECTION CAMPAIGN, COULD THAT TAKE VOTERS AWAY FROM HIM, COULD VERY WELL GO BOTH WAYS.

>> PAUL JOHNSON, THE CHAIR OF THE INDEPENDENT PARTY STARTED FLOATING THE IDEA OF CHANGING THE NAME OVER THE SUMMER, I ASKED SECRETARY FONTES' OFFICE, CAN THEY DO THIS?

THEY TOLD ME THEY DON'T KNOW.

THERE IS NOWHERE IN STATE LAW THAT SAYS YES OR NO, IT IS UP TO THE PRESIDING OFFICIAL ADRIAN FONTES AND UP TO A JUDGE TO DETERMINE WHETHER HE'S CORRECT.

HE SAYS IT DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING, CLEAN ELECTIONS DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING, SO YOU SHOULDN'T DO IT.

ALL THE WAY UP TO THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT WILL HAVE TO DECIDE IT.

TED: COUPLE OF LAWSUITS WILL FIGURE IT OUT.

>>> LET'S MOVE ON HERE, SEEMS LIKE YESTERYEAR FLUORIDE WAS A PRECIOUS PLOT FOR DR.

STRANGE LOVE.

IT'S BACK.

FLUORIDE IS BACK.

WHAT'S GOING ON?

>> FLUORIDE IS BACK.

I FEEL IT'S NEVER GONE AWAY.

EVERY FIVE YEARS SOMEONE IS ANGRY ABOUT FLUORIDE AND WE HAVE SENATOR JANAE SHAMP ANGRY ABOUT FLUORIDE AND RUNNING A BILL THAT WOULD MAKE IT SO CITIES, MOST OF WHICH IN ARIZONA DO THIS RIGHT NOW, CANNOT ADD FLUORIDE TO DRINKING WATER, SOMETHING THAT IS A COMMON PRACTICE, PUBLIC HEALTH PRACTICE MEANT TO PREVENT TOOTH DECAY.

SO THIS WOULD TAKE AWAY CITIES' ABILITY TO DO SO.

>> JUST AMAZING, I'VE BEEN READING FLUORIDE STORIES FOR A LONG TIME.

MY FAVORITE STORY WRITTEN ABOUT FLUORIDE WHEN MESA ADDED FLUORIDE TO DRINKING WATER AND THE STORY WAS THEY JOINED THE 20th CENTURY.

SOME PEOPLE THINK IT IS LINKED TO CERTAIN TYPES OF DISEASES AND THINGS LIKE THAT, AS PART OF THE MAHA, MAKE AMERICA HEALTHY AGAIN.

TONIGHT POINT OUT THIS IS COPYCAT LEGISLATION BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN OTHER STATES PROPOSE SIMILAR PIECES OF LEGISLATION, BASED ON THAT MAHA AGENDA AND OTHER CONCERNS, YOU KNOW, OVER LINKS WHETHER THEY'RE TRUE OR NOT, AND I DON'T THINK THEY'RE TRUE.

FLUORIDE IS CONNECTED TO AUTISM OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT YOU'RE SEEING OTHER THINGS PROPOSED THAT ARE SIMILAR.

>> NOT TO GET ON OTHER WAY.

THERE ARE LINKS WITH FLUORIDE IN HIGH AMOUNTS THAT CAUSE HEALTH RISKS AND IT IS INDICATIVE OF A LOT OF CLAIMS WITH THE MAHA MOVEMENT.

THEY TAKE SOMETHING THAT HAS A GRAIN OF TRUTH AND WITHOUT ANY DISTINCTION ATTACH IT TO SOMETHING ELSE.

AMOUNT FLUORIDE IN THE WATER IN THE CITIES IS WELL BELOW THE LEVELS DEEMED SAFE BY THE CDC FOR YEARS, BUT AGAIN, SO THEY TAKE SOMETHING THAT DOES HAVE A KERNEL, OVEREXPOSURE TO FLUORIDE CAN HAVE BAD EFFECTS FOR YOUR HEALTH.

AGAIN, THIS IS CONNECTING TWO DOTS THAT DON'T NEED TO BE CONNECTED UNLESS WE START PUMPING THAT FLUORIDE OUT.

TED: ASIDE FROM THE HEALTH ISSUES HERE, I BELIEVE THE LAWSUIT, OR THE PROPOSED BILL, I SHOULD SAY -- I'M SO LAWSUIT ORIENTED, THE PROPOSED BILL WOULD SAY THE PROBLEM HERE IT'S MEDICATION, FORCED MEDICATION WITHOUT INFORMED CONSENT, A, AND, B, NO WAY TO OPT OUT IF PUBLIC DRINKING WATER IS FULL OF FLUORIDE AND YOU DON'T WANT IT?

>> THAT'S BEEN AN ARGUMENT WHENEVER THIS HAS COME UP, THIS IS LIKE A NANNY STATE SITUATION.

IF PEOPLE WANT TO HAVE FLUORIDE IN THEIR LIFE, THEY CAN BUY TOOTHPASTE WITH FLUORIDE IN IT, THAT THEY DON'T NEED TO BE MEDICATED IS THE TERM THEY USE, WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT OR INFORMED KNOWLEDGE, THAT THERE'S NOT A WAY TO SAY I WOULD LIKE THE UNFLOURIDATED WATER, PLEASE.

THAT IS THE ARGUMENT, THIS IS TAKING OUR RIGHTS WHETHER TO DECIDE WHETHER WE WANT FLUORIDE OR NOT.

>> THIS IS A REMINDER, THE TYPE OF YEAR, WHERE PREFILING A LOT OF LEGISLATION, A LOT OF HEADLINE-GRABBING PIECES OF LEGISLATION.

REMEMBER ON PIECES LIKE THIS, THE QUESTION IS GOING TO BE WHETHER GOVERNOR KATIE HOBBS IS GOING TO SIGN THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION OR WHETHER OR NOT SHE'S GOING TO ADD TO HER RECORD NUMBER OF VETOES SHE'S ALREADY CIRCLED.

EVERYBODY ELSE WHO HELD THAT JOB.

TED: THAT GOES TO THE NEXT QUESTION, HOW FAR DOES THIS GO?

I THINK GOVERNOR HOBBS WOULD OBVIOUSLY VETO SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

HOW FAR DOES IT GO IN AN ELECTION YEAR WHEN PEOPLE WANT TO GET OUT RELATIVELY EARLY AND NOT TOO MUCH FOOLISHNESS GOING ON.

HOW FAR DOES IT GO?

>> I USED TO THINK THAT WAS TRUE.

LAST ELECTION THEY PLAYED THE STRING TO THE END.

WITH FUND-RAISING AND OUTSIDE GROUPS, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH MOTIVATION THERE IS TO GET OUT EARLY.

JANAE SHAMP WAS A MEMBER OF SENATE LEADERSHIP, WAS KICKED OUT AFTER A TIFF WITH THE PRESIDENT.

A LOT OF HOW FAR IT GOES DEPENDS ON THE INTERNAL POLITICS OF THE LEGISLATURE THAN WHETHER PEOPLE THINK IT'S GOOD POLICY.

UNFORTUNATELY THAT'S HOW PUBLIC LEGISLATURE WORKS SOMETIMES.

>> I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF IT GETS OUT OF THE SENATE AND GOES IN THE HOUSE OR MAYBE PUT IT IN A DRAWER AND GOES NO WHERE.

I DON'T SEE THIS GOVERNOR SIGNING A FLUORIDE BILL LIKE THAT.

TED: MAYBE LEADERSHIP THROWS A BONE HERE?

>> LAST TIME THE LEGISLATURE RAN MAHA LEGISLATION, THAT COULD INCENTIVIZE LEADERSHIP DOWN THERE RUNNING FOR RE-ELECTION OR NEW OFFICES TO HAVE A NICE PHOTO-OP WITH THE ADMINISTRATION.

TED: THERE YOU GO.

WE HAVE OUR PRIORITIES.

ALL RIGHT, E-SCOOTER, ALL OF US HAVE BEEN CLOSE TO BEING DECAPITATED BY AN E-SCOOTER SOMEWHERE ON A SIDEWALK NEAR YOU.

THERE'S A BILL ADDRESSING THE ISSUE?

>> THERE IS.

THERE'S A BILL FOR EVERYTHING.

AS DENNIS SAID, THE PREFILING IS HAPPENING.

I FEEL LIKE YOU CAN'T HAVE A REASONABLE OPINION ABOUT E-SCOOTERS.

YOU EITHER LOVE OR HATE THEM.

THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO DON'T LIKE THEM, AND SENATOR KAVANAGH IS LOOKING TO CAP THEIR SPEED.

THAT IS THE ROUTE HE'S TAKING.

SO I BELIEVE IT WOULD CAP YOU DOWN TO 15 MILES PER HOUR AND THEN EVEN LOWER THAN THAT, SOMETHING LIKE FIVE MILES PER HOUR IF YOU ARE PASSING SOMEONE.

TED: THIS IS E-BIKES, IT'S SCOOTERS, AND IT'S BICYCLES AS WELL, TRUE?

>> AND IT'S ANNOYING, TED.

I LIVE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WITH BIKE LANES, AND SOME OF THE SCOOTERS ARE GOING FASTER THAN THE ACTUAL CARS.

TED: YEAH.

>> I SPOKE WITH JOHN KAVANAGH EARLIER IN THE WEEK, AND I SUSPECTED HE SAW THIS AND WAS ANNOYED AND FILED A BILL.

IF YOU DON'T KNOW JOHN KAVANAGH HIS POLITICAL POLICY IS THE POLITICS OF PERSONAL ANNOYANCE.

IF HE'S ANNOYED THERE IS LEGISLATION ON THIS.

HE TOLD ME IT'S A CONSTITUENT BILL.

GIVEN EVERYBODY'S EXPERIENCES HERE, THE E-BIKES CAN BE DANGEROUS, IF YOU ARE WALKING OR USING THE BIKE LANE, SOME OF THE BIKES CAN RUN INTO YOU, HIT AND YOU CAUSE REAL PROBLEMS.

>> I ACTUALLY COVERED THE CITY OF SCOTTSDALE FOR SEVERAL YEARS, AND THESE SCOOTERS COMING ONLINE WAS SMACK-DAB IN THE MIDDLE, AND THEY ARE FLYING OUTSIDE MY OFFICE ALMOST GETTING HIT.

I DID A STORY AND CONTACTED THE LOCAL HOSPITAL IN DOWNTOWN SCOTTSDALE.

AND SHE SAID WE'VE SEEN EXPONENTIAL INCREASE IN FACIAL INJURIES AS PEOPLE FLY OVER THE HANDLE BARS.

THAT HASN'T REALLY CHANGED.

MIGHT BE A REAL PROBLEM TO BE ADDRESSED HERE.

>> YOU MENTIONED 15 MILES AN HOUR AND 10 MILES AN HOUR PASSING OTHER CYCLES.

RADAR GUNS IN BIKE LANES?

>> MAYBE.

MAYBE.

SO IT SEEMS LIKE SOME OF THEM HAVE SPEEDOMETERS OR MOST OR AT LEAST A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER DON'T.

THAT'S ONE OF THE CONCERNS.

HOW DO YOU MONITOR YOUR SPEED, IF YOU'RE NOT GOOD AT ESTIMATING THINGS?

I THINK THIS IS ALL BEGGING A BIGGER QUESTION OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE IS NOT SET UP TO SUPPORT THESE, RIGHT?

THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED ON SIDEWALKS.

THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO GO IN THE BIKE LANE, AS YOU SAID SOMETIME THEY ARE GOING FASTER THAN CARS, CERTAINLY GOING FASTER THAN REGULAR BIKES.

SO YOU'RE PUTTING THE E-BIKER IN DANGER IF THEY'RE IN THE STREET.

YOU'RE PUTTING THE BIKENER DANGER IF THE E-BIKE IS IN THE BIKE LANE.

I TALKED TO URBAN PLANNERS ABOUT THIS, AND THEY'RE LIKE, IF THESE CONTINUE TO TAKE OFF IN POPULARITY, WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO ACCOMMODATE THEM ON OUR ROADS.

WE SEE IN SUN CITY AND OTHER PLACES GOLF CART LANES.

WOULD WE HAVE E-SCOOTER LANE IN DOWNTOWN SCOTTSDALE, PERHAPS?

>> YOU CAN FILE ALL THE LEGISLATION, AND FEEL GOOD AT THE END OF THE DAY, JOE OR JANE LAWMAKER, WE DID SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

IT'S ONE THING TO PASS THE BILL, ANOTHER THING TO ENFORCE THE BILL.

HOW ARE YOU GOING TO ENFORCE THIS?

ARE COPS GOING TO BE OUT THERE WITH RADAR GUNS?

THE E-BIKES ARE EVERYWHERE, WE KNOW IN PHOENIX AND OTHER POLICE DEPARTMENTS ARE STRUGGLING WITH HIRING NEW POLICE OFFICERS.

THEY'RE OVERBURDENED AS IT IS RIGHT NOW, AND NOW YOU'RE GOING TO THROW THIS ONTO THE PLATE?

THAT'S THE BIG QUESTION.

>> AND LIKE YOU SAID, OUR LEGISLATORS LIKE TO TOSS LAWS ONTO OUR CITIES AND TOWNS AND UP TO THEM TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO IT.

THAT'S WHERE THIS WILL HAPPEN.

MY GUESS IS IT'S MORE A SHOT OVER THE BOUGH, YOU HOPE THEY INFLUENCE BEHAVIOR THAT WAY.

HOW THEY ENFORCE IT.

TED: SHOT OVER THE BOUGH, IF IT WINDS UP ON THE GOVERNOR'S DESK, WHAT DOES SHE DO WITH SOMETHING LIKE THIS?

>> MY GUESS, BASED ON THE PAST IS THIS IS SOMETHING SHE CAN SIGN.

MAYBE IT'S MAKING IT SAFER FOR FAMILIES, ANYTHING THAT WOULDN'T LOOK GOOD IN A CAMPAIGN AGAINST YOU, GOVERNOR KATIE HOBBS, THE ZOOMING SCOOTER GOING BY.

I DON'T THINK SHE WANTS THAT.

IF IT MADE IT TO HER DESK, SHE WILL SIGN IT.

>> HOW POWERFUL IS THE E-BIKE LAW?

WE'LL FIND OUT.

>> WHO HASN'T BEEN ALMOST DECAPITATED BY ONE?

THIS IS SOMETHING PEOPLE GET BEHIND IF THEY KNOW THEY PROBABLY DON'T ENFORCE IT, IT DOESN'T ACCOMPLISH A LOT.

TED: INTERESTING TO SEE A VOTE ON THIS ONE.

>> AND IT MIGHT BE MORE INTERESTING IF THEY APPROACHED IT FROM A MANUFACTURER POINT OF VIEW.

YOU CAN ONLY SELL BIKES THAT -- TED: GET A GOVERNOR ON THEM SO YOU CAN'T GET PAST 15 AND YOU HAVE THE SOUPED-UP E-BIKES AND CAUSING TROUBLE AT HIS HIGH SCHOOL.

WE MOVE ON.

WHO IS REPRESENTATIVE STACY TRAVERS, AND WHY DOES SHE THINK THAT LAWMAKERS ARE UNDERPAID?

>> STACY TRAVERS IS A REALLY INTERESTING LAWMAKER, INTERESTING PERSON, I GOT TO TALK WITH HER THIS WEEK, SHE HAS FILED LEGISLATION TO TAKE TO THE BALLOT NEXT YEAR.

SHE WANTS TO GIVE LAWMAKERS A PAY RAISE FROM $26,000 A YEAR TO $36,000 A YEAR.

THERE WOULD BE A TRADE-OFF IN EXCHANGE FOR GETTING MORE MONEY, A TIGHTER, STRICTER TERM LIMITS ON STATE LAWMAKERS, THE KIND YOU CAN'T WRIGGLE AROUND, WE TALKED ABOUT JOHN KAVANAGH.

THE KING OF WORKING AROUND TERM LIMITS BECAUSE HE'S BEEN DOWN AT THE LEGISLATURE ABOUT 20 YEARS BECAUSE HE SERVES SO MANY YEARS IN THE HOUSE, MOVES OVER TO THE SENATE AND GOES BACK AND FORTH.

THIS WOULD BE A LIFETIME BAN, YOU CAN SERVE FOUR TERMS IN THE HOUSE, FOUR YEARS IN THE SENATE, EIGHT YEARS AND AFTER THAT YOU COULDN'T SERVE IN THE LEGISLATURE.

TED: CAVANAUGH HAS AN IDEA TO RAISE IT UP TO $48,000 A YEAR, AND KEEP INFLATION LEVEL SINCE THE LAST PAY RAISE WAS IN 19 -- WHAT?

WHEN WAS THE LAST PAY RAISE?

>> '98?

>> YOU PEG IT TO INFLATION SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK AND ASK FOR MORE OFF RAISE IT UP TO A CERTAIN LEVEL, AND UNSURPRISINGLY HIS WOULD NOT INCLUDE A TERM LIMIT CONNECTION.

ONE OF THE REASONS REPRESENTATIVE TRAVERS IS INCLUDES THAT IS BECAUSE, AS YOU MENTIONED, VOTERS ARE HESITANT TO APPROVE SALARIES FOR LAWMAKERS.

WE ALL HAVE FAMILY MEMBERS WHO AREN'T INTIMATELY INVOLVED IN POLITICS, AND WHETHER THEY ARE LOCAL, STATE OR FEDERAL, USUALLY NOT GOOD.

WHEN THEY ARE ASKING FOR PAY RAISES, JUSTIFIED OR NOT, THEY DON'T WANT TO SAY YES.

>> JOHN KAVANAGH WILL TELL YOU, VOTERS HAVE A CHANCE TO TERM LIMIT THEM, TO VOTE THEM OUT OF OFFICE.

AND HE DOESN'T LIKE THE IDEA OF TELLING VOTERS THEY CAN'T VOTE FOR SOMEBODY THEY CAN'T LIKE.

TED: THAT IS ALWAYS THE ARGUMENT AGAINST TERM LIMIT, AND YET WHEN WE TALK ABOUT PAY RAISES, $24,000.

THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO BE PART-TIME LEGISLATURE, CITIZEN LEGISLATURE, YOU GO IN AND GET YOUR WORK DONE.

AS WAYNE ELOQUENTLY POINTED OUT, THEY ARE THERE ALL THE TIME NOW.

>> THEY ARE.

AND $24,000 A YEAR, NOWHERE IN ARIZONA IS THAT A LIVABLE WAGE.

IT'S HARD TO FIND AN EMPLOYER WHO IS COOL WITH YOU TAKING OFF HALF THE YEAR BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO BE AT THE LEGISLATURE.

SEVERELY LIMITS THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE ABLE TO RUN, MUCH LESS WILLING TO RUN FOR OFFICE, AND SO LIKE, THE RUNNING JOKE IS YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR, YOU OFTEN HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE RETIRED OR INDEPENDENTLY WEALTHY THAT ARE ABLE TO TAKE THIS KIND OF A MASSIVE PAY CUT.

>> YEAH, I THINK EVEN RAISING THE SALARY TO $36,000 A YEAR, WHO CAN SURVIVE ON THAT?

HAVE YOU SEEN HOME PRICES AND RENTAL PRICES RECENTLY?

I THINK IT'S A BIG ISSUE THERE ABOUT THE PAY THAT CAN LIMIT THE POOL OF CANDIDATES THAT GO DOWN THERE.

YOU BROUGHT UP THE IDEA, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A CITIZEN LEGISLATURE, IT'S NOT A CITIZEN LEGISLATURE ANYMORE.

THEY ARE DOWN THERE ALL THE TIME.

I THINK YOU MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER -- I DON'T THINK THIS WILL HAPPEN, MAKING IT A FULL-TIME LEGISLATURE, UP THE PAY, AND YOU CAN BROADEN THAT POOL AND GET MORE PERSPECTIVES FROM PEOPLE IN DAILY LIFE THAN WHAT YOU ARE GETTING RIGHT NOW.

>> THE LAWMAKERS WOULD ARGUE IT'S A FULL-TIME LEGISLATURE ALREADY, IN ADDITION TO BEING THERE SIX MONTHS OF THE YEAR.

THE OTHER SIX MONTHS, THEY'RE NOT SITTING ON THEIR HANDS, THERE IS CONSTITUENT WORK, AND WORKING ON THE BILLS THAT THEY'RE PREFILING NOW, ALL THAT KIND OF THING.

IN ADDITION TO WHAT JESSICA SAID, YOU ARE GETTING OLDER FOLKS, RETIRED FOLKS, INDEPENDENTLY WEALTHY FOLKS AND FOLKS THAT ARE EMPLOYED BY QUASI POLITICAL ORGANIZATIONS.

YOU CAN'T ACTIVELY LOBBY, THERE ARE INTEREST GROUPS AND POLITICAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE MARKETING PEOPLE OR SPOKESPEOPLE WHO WORK AT THE LEGISLATURE, THAT CAN BE A PROBLEM.

>> ANOTHER ISSUE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP.

I'M NOT SAYING THIS IS HAPPENING.

IF YOU HAVE PEOPLE MAKING SO LITTLE MONEY AND PUTS THEM MORE AT RISK TO CORRUPTION, BEING INFLUENCED A LOT BY LAWMAKERS.

$24,000, YOU BUY SOMEONE AN EXPENSIVE DINNER AT A STEAKHOUSE SOMEWHERE.

HOW MUCH INFLUENCE -- THAT MIGHT BUY YOU MORE INFLUENCE THAN IF YOU ARE MAKING MORE MONEY.

THAT'S WHAT'S BEEN TOLD TO ME BY OTHER PEOPLE.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT IS HAPPENING, BUT IT IS A CONCERN.

TED: IS ANYONE CONCERNED WHAT KIND OF TURNOUT THIS MIGHT BRING TO THE BALLOTS, THE BALLOTS FULL OF ALL SORTS OF THINGS HERE, IS THERE ANY CONCERN ABOUT MAYBE BRINGING SOMEONE WHO IS AGAINST ME, FOR ME, IS THAT A FACTOR IN SOMETHING LIKE THIS?

>> I DON'T REALLY THINK SO.

I THINK IT GOES BACK TO THE CRUX OF THIS, WHICH IS THAT VOTERS JUST HAVE GENERALLY -- THEY DON'T GET TO THE POINT WHERE THEY ONLY MAKE $24,000.

THEY GO YOU WANT A RAISE?

I DON'T LIKE POLITICIANS, WHY WOULD YOU GET A RAISE?

THEY DON'T THINK OF THE BIGGER PICTURE QUESTIONS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

I THINK THE ONLY WAY SOMETHING LIKE THIS IS GOING TO BE SUCCESSFUL IS WHEN YOU WRAP IT INTO SOMETHING MORE PALLETABLE LIKE THE TERM LIMITS.

I GOT CLARITY THAT THE TERM LIMITS WOULD START AFTER THIS WOULD BE PASSED.

TED: YES.

>> SO JOHN KAVANAGH COULD SERVE ANOTHER 16 YEARS.

>> YOU WANT TO RAISE ANOTHER ISSUE REGARDING THIS.

THERE ARE LAWMAKERS WHO ARE ABLE TO WORK AROUND AND MAKE A LOT MORE THAN $24,000 A YEAR, BY USING THE PER DIEM, PARTICULARLY OUT OF COUNTY, OUT OF MARICOPA COUNTY, YOU GET PER DIEM PLUS MILEAGE.

SOME LAWMAKERS HAVE FOUND A WAY TO MAKE DOUBLE THE SALARY DOWN THERE BY USING THAT.

TED: WHICH WE'LL USE IN AN ARGUMENT IF IT GETS TO THE BALLOT.

WAYNE, THE BOARD OF EDUCATION HAS REVISED TEACHING STANDARDS AND NO DEI LIKE PRESIDENT TRUMP WANTS.

HE WANTS IT, YOU GET IT.

>> THIS GOES BACK TO EXECUTIVE ORDER THE PRESIDENT SENT OUT BASICALLY TRYING TO DEFUND FEDERAL GRANTS FOR ANY PERCEIVED DEI, DIVERSITY EQUITY INCLUSION PROGRAM FOLLOWED BY MEMOS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SAYING GET RID OF THIS STUFF OR YOU LOSE YOUR MONEY.

SUPERINTENDENT TOM HORNE INTERPRETED THAT WE COULD LOSE ALL THE MONEY, 860+ MILLION.

HE'S PUSHING FOR THE BOARD TO REMOVE THE LANGUAGE, THEY VOTED AND SAID WE'RE GOING TO STRICTLY GET A WORKING GROUP TOGETHER AND GO THROUGH LINE-BY-LINE AND FIND OUT WHICH WORDS POTENTIALLY VIOLATE THIS EXECUTIVE ORDER, WHICH IS ON HOLD, PENDING COURT DECISIONS AND STRIP THEM OUT.

TED: HOW DO WE KNOW?

HOW WILL THEY KNOW WHAT EQUATES TO DEI?

>> THAT'S REALLY THE BIG QUESTION, AND WHY WE'RE IN THIS WEIRD SITUATION IS THAT FIRST OF ALL, THE WAY THE NORMAL PUBLIC TALKS ABOUT DEI IS PROBABLY NOT WHAT IT ACTUALLY MEANS TO MOST PEOPLE, TO OTHER PEOPLE.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT BASICALLY THE DEPARTMENT WITH THE HELP OF THIS WORKING GROUP IS GOING TO DECIDE WHAT DEI IS, AND THEN THEY GO THROUGH AND STRIP OUT THOSE WORDS.

THAT CREATES A SITUATION WHERE IT'S VERY UNCLEAR WHAT THE LONG-TERM IMPACT IS.

>> I THINK IT'S INTERESTING TOO, IF DEI IS SUCH A PROBLEM, THE DEAN OF THE COMMITTEE TO STUDY THIS TO FIND THE PROBLEM, AND I INTERVIEWED TOM HORNE ABOUT THE ISSUE.

HE WASN'T ABLE TO COME UP WITH SPECIFICS THAT WAS DEI, WASN'T ABLE TO COME UP WITH SPECIFICS.

THEN I ASKED HIM, HOW DO YOU THINK THIS AFFECTS THE CLASSROOM OR WOULD AFFECT THE CLASSROOM?

HE SAYS PROBABLY NOT MUCH.

HERE WE ARE.

>> AND THEY INCLUDED IN THE DIRECTIONS OF THIS WORKING GROUP, IT WAS ESSENTIALLY LIKE COMPLYING WITH THE EXECUTIVE ORDER WHILE MAINTAINING A HIGH LEVEL OF EDUCATION STANDARD, SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT.

I THINK THE IDEA ULTIMATELY IS HOW CAN WE APPEASE THE PRESIDENT WITHOUT TURNING OUR SCHOOLS AND EDUCATION STANDARDS UPSIDE DOWN.

ULTIMATELY THAT'S ALL YOU NEED TO DO.

YOU NEED THE ADMINISTRATION TO BELIEVE THAT YOU ARE COMPLYING WITH THEIR ORDER AND YOU ARE NOT BEING OBSTINANT.

IF YOU DO, THAT THEY PULL BACK THE THREAD.

TED: ISN'T THIS ORDER, WHAT IF IT DOESN'T SURVIVE THE LAWSUIT.

THEN WHAT HAPPENS?

>> IT VERY WELL LIKELY MAY NOT, BUT IT DOESN'T MATTER AT THIS POINT, AND I THINK TO WAYNE'S POINT, IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY MATTER WHAT THE ORDER IS.

IT'S ABOUT THE PRESIDENT BELIEVING THAT YOU HAVE GOTTEN RID DEI, WHATEVER THAT SHOULD MEAN.

IF THAT MEANS TAKING A FEW WORDS OUT OF THE STANDARDS AND WE KEEP THE REST OF OUR CURRICULUM THE SAME AND EVERYONE STOPS TALKING ABOUT IT, I THINK EVERYONE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, THE BOARD OF EDUCATION WOULD BE THRILLED.

TED: BASICALLY FIND A BULL HORN AND SAY LOOK, WE GOT RID OF IT, AND MOVE ON.

>> YEAH, PART OF WHAT'S FUELING THIS IS TO GET AHEAD OF SOMETHING AS TOM HORNE SAID.

WE WANT TO BE PREPARED, WE DON'T WANT TO BE CAUGHT WITH THE MANUALS AND PUT US AT RISK OF LOSING FUNDING, WHERE THE RUBBER MEETS THE ROAD ON THIS IS WHEN THEY START TAKE THINGS OUT.

IF THERE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS TO TAKE CERTAIN THINGS OUT.

WHAT DO THE RECOMMENDATIONS MEAN TO THE DAY TO DAY LIFE IN THE CLASSROOM?

>> THEY'RE NOT EXPECTED TO MAKE THE RECOMMENDATIONS UNTIL SEPTEMBER OF NEXT YEAR.

THAT RUNWAY, MY WILD SPECULATION, MIGHT BE BECAUSE OF THE COURT ORDERS.

TED: RIGHT.

>> UP UNTIL THAT POINT, IT'S DISBANDING A WORKING GROUP IF THE COURT UPHOLDS THIS EXECUTIVE ORDER ISN'T LEGAL AND IF THE COURT SAYS, YEAH, THIS CAN GO FORWARD, YOU KEEP THE GROUP DOING ITS WORK.

TED: HOW DIVISIVE IS THIS IN CLASSROOMS, IN TEACHER LOUNGES, IN THESE SORTS OF PLACES, DO WE KNOW?

>> WHAT WE HEAR THE MOST IS IT'S MORE ANNOYANCE THIS IS THE TOPIC OF CONVERSATIONS INSTEAD A LOT OF OTHER VERY IMPORTANT TOPICS OF CONVERSATION IN THE CLASSROOM.

CLASS SIZES, TEACHER PAY, ANYTHING THAT ACTUALLY MATTERS TO THE DAY TO DAY EDUCATION OF OUR STUDENTS, THIS ISN'T IT.

TED: REAL QUICK.

>> TEACHERS, IT'S ANOTHER PIECE OF FRUSTRATION WITH TEACHERS.

I KEEP HEARING THEY'RE FRUSTRATED ABOUT ALL OF THE POLITICS OUTSIDE THE CLASSROOM FILTERING INTO THE CLASSROOM.

TED: GOT TO STOP IT RIGHT THERE.

PANEL, GOOD TO HAVE YOU ALL HERE.

GREAT CONVERSATION.

THAT'S IT FOR NOW.

I'M TED SIMONS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

YOU HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND.