The sorry state of state government politics

Robert Robb

SUBMITTED PHOTO

We used to have political leaders who could play the game, in the governor’s chair and in legislative leadership. And even when representing different political parties. The governorships of Democrats Bruce Babbitt and Janet Napolitano were highly productive, even though Republicans were in control of the Legislature. If this particular issue had come up during their tenure, it probably never would have risen to the attention of the public as a big political fight.”

Watching the political play in Arizona state government, the lament of manager Casey Stengel about his 1962 New York Mets keeps coming to mind: “Can’t anybody here play this game?”

Take the current ruction between Gov. Katie Hobbs and GOP legislative leaders over funding for programs to assist those with developmental disabilities, particularly the parents as paid caregivers component.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, when it was pretty much impossible and ill-advised to bring outside caregivers into a home, the federal government initiated a Medicaid waiver program allowing parents to become trained and get paid to provide this kind of specialized care.

The program makes sense, even in a non-pandemic environment. Parental care is considerably less expensive than institutionalized care. Appropriately structured, the cost shouldn’t be markedly different than third-party, in-home care. And trained parental care is undoubtedly better for the person being helped and for the family as a whole.

Initially, the federal government was picking up the entire tab, but now a state cost-sharing obligation is kicking in. The program has also attracted roughly twice as many participants as projected. The combination has created a budget hole. Funding runs out in May.

Hobbs has asked for supplemental funding to fill the hole, about $122 million, for the remainder of the fiscal year, or through June. GOP leadership has sought to spin the request as evidence of fiscal mismanagement by the Hobbs administration. There’s a grain of truth in that, but architects of Arizona’s school voucher program should be at least somewhat circumspect about making too big a deal about underestimating participation in and costs of a governmental program.

GOP leadership is trying to force through a solution to the funding shortfall that Hobbs doesn’t like. So, she now says that she will veto any bills passed until a DD funding bill to her satisfaction passes. And legislative Democrats are backing her up by refusing to vote for any bills until such a DD funding bill is enacted.

Hobbs is not the first Arizona governor to pull this stunt. Republican predecessors also did it to legislatures of their own party. It has always struck me as more an act of political theater than true leverage. It inconveniences legislators, but doesn’t really put any pressure on them.

It is a measure of political incompetence all around that this has become a political brouhaha, particularly given the inhuman stress it has put on the families of the developmentally disabled.

The approach GOP leaders want to take to cover costs for the remainder of this fiscal year isn’t unreasonable. They propose to transfer money from the Arizona Competes Fund, the Housing Trust Fund and the Prescription Drug Rebate Fund. The Arizona Competes Fund is a grant program to subsidize business startups, relocations or expansions. It shouldn’t even exist. The Housing Trust Fund will never do anything other than nibble futilely at the very edges of Arizona’s housing affordability issue. The prescription drug rebate program is part of Medicaid and a reasonable source of temporary funding for a Medicaid waiver program.

Given the fragile state of the economy, reallocating existing money rather than a new appropriation is the more prudent course of action. A surplus is still projected for this fiscal year. However, hoarding cash for the future is a smart fiscal move.

The GOP leadership proposal, however, doesn’t just solve the problem for this fiscal year by reallocating existing funds. The hours for which a parent can be compensated for care is currently uncapped. Hobbs is moving to cap it at 40 hours a week. The GOP leadership bill would require a waiver request to reduce that to 20 hours. The bill also requires legislative approval of any Medicaid waiver request in the future and increases legislative oversight of federal funds generally.

There are dissenters from these other provisions within the GOP caucus. In fact, in the House, three additional GOP members had to be added to the Appropriations Committee to pass the thing.

What was the point? The speaker can’t add GOP members to the floor when the bill reaches that stage. What’s the political gain in looking mean-spirited by artificially forcing the bill through Appops in a form that can’t pass on the floor? From the Stengel perspective, that’s an error.

If there were the kind of constructive working relationship that should exist between the governor and GOP leaders, even though they are in different parties, the deal to get past the funding cliff for this fiscal year is obvious. The governor accepts the GOP proposal to get through this fiscal year by reallocating funds from those sources. Funding for the program next fiscal year is punted to negotiations for that budget. And the proposals that extend beyond the DD program — legislative approval of all Medicaid waivers and increased legislative oversight of federal funds generally — get spun out for separate consideration.

We used to have political leaders who could play the game, in the governor’s chair and in legislative leadership. And even when representing different political parties. The governorships of Democrats Bruce Babbitt and Janet Napolitano were highly productive, even though Republicans were in control of the Legislature.

If this particular issue had come up during their tenure, it probably never would have risen to the attention of the public as a big political fight. Republicans might have taken a potshot or two about fiscal mismanagement, but legislative action on other things wouldn’t have come to a screeching halt over just two months of funding for a program that saves the state money in the long run. A narrow bridge funding deal would have been negotiated without much fanfare, while getting on with the more serious discussion of what to do with the program after this fiscal year.

Hobbs doesn’t have the political skills or persona of Babbitt or Napolitano. However, the bigger and more consequential change is the MAGA takeover in the Republican Party. Previous GOP legislative leaders played politics, but also were serious about governing. For the current crop, scoring political points against Democrats is the higher priority.

But they don’t even play that game well. Despite a healthy registration advantage, Republicans control the Legislature by the smallest margin possible. And you have to go back to 1974 for an election in which Democrats won and occupied the three most important statewide offices — governor, secretary of state, and attorney general — as they do now.

As a general proposition, Arizona has benefited from productive leadership in state government. These days, we’re watching the 1962 Mets.

Editor's note: Retired Arizona journalist Robert Robb opines about politics and public policy on Substack. Reach him at robtrobb@gmail.com. Please send your comments to AzOpinions@iniusa.org. We are committed to publishing a wide variety of reader opinions, as long as they meet our Civility Guidelines.