Goldwater Institute

It’s like a bad re-run. A few legislators are trying to revive Arizona’s film production tax credit (SB 1170) that lapsed in 2011.

According to the last annual report on the effectiveness of the credit, in 2009 four media companies completed production on credit-approved projects. After taking into consideration the small bit of sales tax revenue the film generated while in production, the state paid out a net of just over $2 million in tax credits. That’s an average of half a million dollars per project.

How many jobs did that create? About 41 jobs directly related to the project and another 20 that were presumably from the ripple effect on the local economy. An analysis by economists at the W.P. Carey School at Arizona State University shows that these jobs were temporary and, thus, the post-production employment impact of this tax credit was “minimal.”

States like Washington and Iowa terminated their film credit programs last year and others have suspended them until their effectiveness can be studied. The general consensus among analysts is that these credits cost more than they’re worth and their existence owes more to star-struck policymakers than it does to economic logic.

The legislature this year, just as they did last year, should avoid putting Arizona taxpayers back on the hook for film production. Arizona doesn’t need to buy another ticket to this overpriced flop.

Learn more:

Arizona Department of Commerce: Motion Picture Production Tax Incentive Annual Report for 2009 (PDF)

Tax Foundation: Report on Film Tax Credit (2011)

American Indian students are more likely to live in poverty and face unemployment later in life. These children carry the burdens of geographic isolation and multi-generational poverty that are heavy to lift.

In my conversations with state leaders on ways to help students in chronically failing schools—ideas such as expanding eligibility for education savings accounts and allowing parents to petition to convert a failing school to a charter school—policymakers regularly cite the unique challenges presented by American Indian students.

Digital and online learning opportunities offer hope. As Goldwater Institute Senior Fellow Dan Lips explains in his new Policy Brief, Digital Learning: Improve Educational Opportunities for American Indian Students, online programs can be made available to any student and would increase educational opportunities in rural areas and on reservations.

Over 300,000 American Indians from 21 tribes call Arizona home, and American Indian students comprise 5 percent of the state’s K-12 population. These students score well below their white peers on the nation’s report card, often lagging behind other minority groups such as African American and Hispanic students. Among 4th graders, 70 percent of American Indian students score below the basic level. Only 8 percent can read at grade level.

Lips’ Policy Brief explains how policymakers can incorporate blended-learning programs into the classroom; provide a specific option for children attending Bureau of Indian Education schools to allow them to enroll in Arizona Online Instruction classes; expand private school choice programs to offer full or partial scholarships to American Indian students to enroll in virtual school courses; and create a Federal Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) Virtual School.

Reasonable people can disagree about what’s best for American Indians in the 21st century. But everyone agrees that more quality educational choices for children of any heritage are worth pursuing.

Learn more:

Goldwater Institute: Digital Learning: Improved Educational Opportunities for American Indian Students

Arizona Department of Education: 2007 Indian Education Annual Report

Arizona Republic: Arizona's American Indians

Unruly, inept and ineffective state workers would face more swift and sure discipline under an overhaul of government personnel rules being pushed by Gov. Jan Brewer.

The long-awaited plan unveiled by the governor this week would gradually make most state workers “at-will employees,” meaning agency administrators would have more power to impose discipline for misbehavior or poor performance. Most state employees are now covered by laws and personnel rules that make imposing discipline costly and time consuming, according to the Goldwater Institute investigation, “Undisciplined Bureaucracy,” published in December 2010.

Brewer’s 275-page proposal is scheduled to be heard by the House Employment and Regulatory Affairs committee today. It is sponsored by Rep. Justin Olson, R-Mesa, a member of the committee.

The Goldwater Institute’s investigation exposed the cumbersome process that must be followed to discipline a government worker in Arizona. Bad behavior ranging from sleeping on duty to sexual harassment typically is not enough to get a government employee fired, the investigation showed. State workers are frequently put on prolonged periods of paid administrative leave, sent home to draw full pay and benefits while disciplinary investigations are conducted.

A month after the Goldwater Institute’s report was published, Brewer announced she would make revamping the state’s personnel rules one of her top priorities.

The centerpiece of Brewer’s package is to move most state employees to an at-will personnel system, similar to what is typical in the private sector.

“This is a debate that reformers must win,” Brewer said in a prepared statement announcing her plan.

Brewer’s plan would also give agency directors more flexibility in hiring workers and setting their pay, according to an outline released by the governor’s office. It also would limit the ability of the State Personnel Board to alter disciplinary decisions imposed by agency directors, and require that when layoffs occur they are based on an employee’s performance rather than years of seniority.

Learn more:

Goldwater Institute: Full Report: Governor Proposes Sweeping Civil-Service Reforms

Governor’s Office: Personnel Reform: Putting the Pieces Together for a Better Arizona

Goldwater Institute: Undisciplined Bureaucracy: The Difficulty in Disciplining a Government Worker

Ask any grassroots activist and he’ll tell you that getting out the vote is tough, because the majority of Arizonans have busy lives beyond the ballot-box. Worse still, with elections happening at a variety of times throughout a two-year cycle, many voters don’t know when an election is taking place.

This gives special-interest groups the upper hand because they can turn out their supporters on obscure election days while regular Arizonans are left in the dark.

This could all change with a single piece of legislation.

HB 2826, a bill currently moving its way through the Arizona Legislature, conforms all election dates across the state—from bond to municipal to statewide—to occur in the August-November cycle of even-numbered years.

In Scottsdale, where municipal elections have been consolidated to Novembers in even-numbered years since 2008, voter participation has ranged from 60 percent to over 85 percent. Previously, when Scottsdale municipal elections occurred in the springtime, voter turnout rarely rose above 30 percent.

Voter turnout suffers in cities without consolidated election dates.

Less than 30 percent of registered voters turned out in Phoenix’s 2011 mayoral election, and only 25 percent voted in the council races in 2009. Tucson’s 2011 mayoral election turned out just over 30 percent of registered voters.

This is not an indicator of voter apathy in those cities. When Tucson placed a municipal ballot question on the 2010 general election ballot, over 60 percent of registered voters participated.

The Arizona Legislature has a long history of pursuing legislation to increase citizen participation in the voting process—the motor-voter initiative, the permanent early voting list, and other voter-awareness campaigns. HB 2826 is the natural next step to increase voter participation across the state and make Arizonans’ voices heard.

Special interest groups that enjoy advancing their agendas under the radar in off-cycle elections are likely to oppose HB 2826. But the measure is a slam-dunk for Arizonans who want to give all voters a voice in elections at every level of government.

Learn more:

Arizona Legislature: House Bill 2826