>> "ARIZONA HORIZON" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE FRIENDS OF ARIZONA PBS.

FROM THE FRIENDS OF ARIZONA PBS.

MEMBERS OF YOUR PUBLIC TELEVISION STATION.

>> KIND OF LIKE LITTLE MONEY ADDED ON AT THE END OF THE YEAR FOR MAKE UP FOR BUDGET SHORTFALLS ARE NOT THAT RARE AND THE GOVERNOR HAS BEEN ASKING FOR THIS SINCE JANUARY, THE NUMBER HAS GONE UP A BIT BUT THEY ARE BASICALLY SAYING, YOU KNOW, HIGH HIGHER THAN EXPECTED ENROLLMENT, HIGHER THAN EXPECTED COSTS IN THIS PROGRAM THAT PROVIDES SERVICES.

NO ONE WANTS TO TAKE ANY RESPONSIBILITY, SO INSTEAD THEY ARE BLAMING EACH OTHER AND THERE IS NO SOLUTION BECAUSE THEY WANT THE CLEAN FUNDING BILL, REPUBLICANS HAVE A BOIL THEY ARE MOVING BUT SEVERELY CUTTING BACK ON CERTAIN PROGRAMS SPECIFICALLY ONE THAT PAYS PARENTS WHO ACT AT CAREGIVERS THAT A THE LOAF FOLKS IN THE COMMUNITY SAY IS A LIVE SAVER FOR THEM.

>> THE REPUBLICAN PLAN TAKES MONEY FROM OTHER SOURCES, CORRECT?

>> REQUIREMENTS THE REPUBLICAN PLAN SWEEPS MONEY FROM A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS.

THE COMMERCE AUTHORITY, IS ONE PLACE THEY ARE TAKING MONEY FROM, ALSO THE STATE HOUSING TRUST FUND.

THEY ARE TAKING MONEY FROM PROGRAMS THAT ARE MEANT FOR HOUSING AND YOU KNOW, THE -- WHEN THEY EXPLAINED IT, YOU KNOW, DEMOCRATS KIND OF QUESTIONED IT DURING THE COMMITTEE HEARING THIS WEEK AND SAID LIKE WHY ARE WE TAKING MONEY FROM HERE AND THE REPUBLICANS ARE BASICALLY LIKE WELL BEING THE MONEY IS THERE SO WE SHOULD BE TABLE TO TAKE IT AND USE IT FOR THIS.

THEY SAID, WELL, YEAH, BUT THIS IS MONEY FOR HOUSING.

THIS HAS -- THIS IS MONEY THAT'S SUPPOSED TO HELP PEOPLE GET IN TO HOMES TO KEEP GETTING FORECLOSE ODD, TO THEN SUBSIDIZE FRIENDS AND LEAPING LIKE THAT.

KEEPING LOW INCOME PEOPLE FROM BECOMING HOMELESS.

AND SO THERE IS A TUSSLE.

THE MONEY EXISTS IN THE GENERAL FUND THE STATE HAS AN OPERATING SURPLUS.

AND DEMOCRATS WHEN THEY OFFERED THEIR VERSION OF THE BILL BASICALLY WERE GOING TO TAKE ALL THE MONEY FROM THE GENERAL FUND AND JUST PUT IT TOWARDS THE THIS PROGRAM.

>> AND THERE WAS REPUBLICAN RESPONSE WAS?

>> WE CAN DO WHAT WE WANT, AND WE'LL PUSH -- >> MANY TIMES.

I MEAN, IT'S NOT LIKE SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS EVERY DAY.

BUT GOVERNOR DUCEY DID IT, REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR WITH A REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE.

GOVERNOR BREWER DID IT, WITH A REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE.

TWO LAWMAKERS DO WHAT THEY WANTED.

USUALLY WITH THEM IT WAS WITH BUDGETS AND BREWER I BELIEVE WE WANT WITH THE MEDICAID EXPANSION BUDGET.

SO, YEAH, IT'S DEFINITELY KIND OF THE NUCLEAR OPTION THAT THEY HAVE AT THEIR DISPOSAL, BECAUSE ALL THE MATILY AT THE END OF THE DAY, THESE LAWMAKERS THEIR JOB IS TO GET THEIR BILLS PASSED AND SHE'S THE ONE WHO COULD STAND IN THE WAY OF THAT.

>> AND I THINK SPEAKER MONTENEGRO CALLED IT POLITICAL BLACKMAIL.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?

BEFORE SHE SAID THIS THE BILL THAT WOULD PASS WOULD BE SAFE AFTERWARDS, NO.

ACTION ONLY BILL, SOME OF THE OTHER BIRTHS WHAT DO WE HAVE?

>> THAT'S THE CHIEF ONE ON HER DESK WAS THAT BILL THAT WOULD ESSENTIALLY CANCEL A REFERENDUM ELECTION IN SCOTTSDALE TO LET AXON WILLED THEIR WE HAD QUARTERS AND APARTMENTS AND A HOTEL IN NORTH SCOTTSDALE.

YOU KNOW, THIS WAS -- I THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, KIND OF AN INTERESTING CARVE OUT THAT THE GOVERNOR DID.

I THINK SHE SIGNALED THAT SHE KIND OF SEENED TO LIKE THAT BILL AND IS PROBABLY GOING TO SIGN AT THAT BILL.

SO IT KIND OF SPARED HER FROM HAVING TO ACT ON THAT IMMEDIATELY.

>> STOLEN VALOR BILL IS ALSO ON HER DIFFERENT?

>> I BELIEVE IT MADE OUT OF THE WILL HE LEGISLATURE OFFICIALLY.

IT'S ON HER DESK WILLING TO BE SIGNED OR VETOES.

THAT'S BEEN THE SUBJECT OF SO MUCH CONTENTION SHE SAID RECENTLY AT THE SAME PRESS CONFERENCE WHERE I THINK SHE MENTIONED THAT SHE SUPPORTS THE AXON BILL WITHOUT SAYING THAT SHE WOULD SIGN IT, SHE SUPPORTS THE STOLEN VALOR ACADEMY SUSPECT THAT SHE WOULD WANT TO SIGN THOSE TWO.

>> OKAY.

THE SO WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

DOES THE REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE PUMP THEM UP THERE SO SHE CAN VETO AND THEY CAN SAY YOU ARE AGAINST THIS AND THAT.

WHAT'S NEXT?

>> WE A IN THE PAST.

I THINK REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS KIND OF TRIED TO PLAY CHICKEN WITH BREWER I BELIEVE, AND SENT A FEW HER WAY AND SHE VETOED THEM AND SO, I MEAN IT WILL BE INCUMBENT ON HOBBS TO MAKE GOOD ON HER THREAT OTHERWISE THEY'LL NEVER BELIEVE HER.

IT'S WORTH NOTING THERE IS A BIPARTISAN SOLUTION OUT THERE.

SPONSORED BY A REPUBLICAN AN AMENDMENT TO THE BILL THAT REPUBLICANS THEMSELVES BLOCKED FROM GETTING A VOTE.

SO IT HAS DEMOCRATIC SUPPORT, IT HAS SOME OF THOSE KIND OF MEASURES IN PLACE, FOR ACCOUNTABILITY MOVING FORWARD THAT REPUBLICANS WANT BUT NOT AS STRICT AS SOME REPUBLICANS WANT.

SO IT'S THERE.

IT'S JUST A MATTER OF WHETHER LEADERSHIP WILL LET IT SEE THE LIGHT OF DAY.

>> AND, YOU KNOW, THAT BIPARTISAN THING, I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO NOTE HOW IT DIED, RIGHT?

IN THE HOUSE A PROP RACES COMMITTEE MOMENTS BEFORE THEY SHOWED UP TO HEAR THIS BILL, REPUBLICANS PUT THREE MORE PEOPLE ON THE COMMITTEE.

SPECIFICALLY TO STACK THE COMMITTEE TO MAKE SURE "A", THAT THE VERSION THAT THEY WANTED GOT PASSED AND "B" THAT THEY WOULD KILL THIS BILL BECAUSE THERE WERE REPUBLICANS ON COMMITTEE BACKING THE AMENDED VERSION.

AND THE DEMOCRATS ALL STOOD UP IN LINE FOR IT.

AND ONE OF THE LAWMAKERS IN PARTICULAR, YOU COULD SEE HIM WALT BLACK MAN FROM SNOWFLAKE A RIB CAB HE WAS SEETHING.

MEETING AS YOU REMEMBER WATCHING IT, YOU COULD SEE HIM.

HE WAS VISIBLY DISPLEASED WITH WHAT WAS GOING ON.

THE AND HE MADE A SPEECH AT THE END OF THE COMMITTEE AND TALKED ABOUT THE BILL AND BASICALLY SAID I AM NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS BILL I WILL VOTE FOR IT IN COMMITTEE TO GET IT OUT OF HERE SO WE CAN AMOUNT IT WE SHOULD LOOK TO THAT BIPARTISAN AMENDMENT AND WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT BECAUSE THIS AFFECTS PEOPLE'S LIVES IN A WAY THAT IS FAR BEYOND, YOU KNOW, KIND OF THE POLITICS OF THE CAPITOL.

>> WHEN THE GOVERNOR GOES I THINK SHE SAID THE ENACT I'VE FEW EXTREME GOP LAWMAKERS.

IS THAT WHAT JIM IS REFERRING TO?

IS THAT WHAT SHE IS REFERRING TO IN.

>> I AM SURE SHE WOULD SAY THAT, YES.

FOUR LAWMAKERS WHO ARE THE TARGET OF A LOT OF IRE ESPECIALLY FROM THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, DEMOCRATS, AND PARENTS AND RECALL EFFORT NOW AGAINST THOSE FOUR WHO I AM THINKING OF WHICH IS MATT GRASS, STEVE MONT MEG RAY, MICHAEL CARBONE AND DAVID LIVINGSTON.

EACH IS NOW OFFICIALLY BE CHALLENGED BY A PARENT OF A CHILD WITH DISABILITY WHO LIVES IN THEIR DISTRICT.

BECAUSE THE PARENTS SAY THAT THEY ARE SO FED UP WITH THE LACK OF ACTION AND AS I MENTIONED EARLIER I THINK IT'S NOT THAT THEY THINK EVERYONE BUT THOSE FOUR PEOPLE ARE BLAMELESS, BUT IT'S MORE A QUESTION OF WHO THEY SAY HAS BEEN WILLING TO SIT DOWN AND MEET WITH THEM AND SPEAK TO THEM ABOUT IT.

>> AND I HAVE BEEN COVERING THIS FROM THE BEGINNING AND EARLY ON THE PARENT GROUPS MADE A REALLY STRIDE HE WANT EFFORT TO BE BIPARTISAN TO THE POINT WHERE WHEN THEY HELD A RALLY THEY WOULDN'T LET LAWMAKERS SPEAK AT THEIR EVENT UNLESS THEY GOT ONE FROM EACH PARTY.

THEY GOT ONE FROM EACH EVENTUALLY NOW THEY ARE FIRMLY ENCAMPED WITH EM DID CONTRACTS BECAUSE THEY VIEW THE REPUBLICANS AS OBSTRUCTING THE SITUATION HERE.

I THINK THERE ARE SOME REEL QUESTIONS ABOUT RISING COSTS IN THE DDD PROGRAM AND MEDICAID PROGRAMS OVERALL THAT NEED TO BE ANSWERED BUT I THINK THERMO ALIGNED WITH THE DEMOCRATIC ARGUMENT WHICH IS LET'S ADDRESS IT WITH THE BUDGET GOING FORWARD NEXT YEAR, BUT THIS PROGRAM IS GOING TO RUN OUT OF MONEY IN TWO WEEKS A SO LET'S GET THE PROGRAMS FUNDED THAT THESE KIDS RELY ON EVERY SINGLE DAY.

SOME TO DO EVERY TASK IN THEIR DAY THEY NEED THAT SUPPORT.

SO I THINK THEY ARE MUCH MORE SYMPATHETIC TO THE DEMOCRATIC ARGUMENT OF LETS GET IT FUNDED FIRST AND THEN FIGURE OUT WHAT STEPS WE NEED TO TAKE TO REIN IN COSTS NEXT.

>> LAST QUESTION ON THIS, WHAT DO YOU THINK WILL HAPPEN?

>> THEY ARE GOING TO FUND IT TO SOME -- IN SOME WAY.

I CAN'T ENVISION A SCENARIO WHERE THEY HIT THE END OF THE MORE AND THE MON -- MORE AND THE MONEY ISN'T THERE AND THE PROGRAMS SHUTDOWN THAT WOULD BE REALLY, REALLY BAD FOR LEDGE -- FOR THE LEGISLATURE, FOR THE GOVERNOR, TOO.

EVEN THOUGH THE GOVERNOR HAS BEEN OUT THERE CHEER LEADING TO GET THE FUNDING ACROSS.

IT WOULD JUST LOOK BAD FOR EVERYTHING.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

I THINK THAT THIS CALL FOR THE MORATORIUM IS JUST ADDING SOME MORE ATTENTION TO IT.

AND ADDING MORE KIND OF FUEL TO THE FIRE TO GET THESE NEGOTIATIONS KIND OF GOING AND INTO A HIGH GEAR.

TO FIGURE OUT WHERE TO GO.

YOU KNOW, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT EVEN IN THAT APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE THAT BIPARTISAN BILL AMENDMENT THAT GOT KILLED.

THERE WERE A LOT OF REPUBLICANS WHO TALKED ABOUT HOW THEY DID LIKE A NUMBER OF PORTIONS OF IT AND THAT THEY WERE WILLING TO INCORPORATE THEM INTO WHATEVER THE FINAL VERSION IS.

SO I THINK THAT THERE IS A PATH FORWARD AT LEAST IN THE HOUSE.

I THINK IT MIGHT BE A BILLS OF A DIFFERENT SITUATION IN THE SENATE.

WHERE THE MAKEUP IS DIFFERENT AND I THINK THE VIEWS OF THIS PROGRAM ARE DIFFERENT.

BUT THERE IS -- THERE DOES SEEM TO BE A PATH FORWARD TO FIND SOME KIND OF AN AGREEMENT.

>> LET'S MOVE ON HERE.

SPEAKING OF VETOES.

THE GOVERNOR, CAMRYN, VETOED THE IDEA OF THE CAN'T BUY SODA POP WITH SNAP FOOD STAMPS, THESE THINGS.

THAT'S A VETO RIGHT THERE.

>> YES.

AN INTERESTING IDENTITY VETO THAT HAPPENED BEFORE THE VETO ANNOUNCEMENT.

THERE ARE TWO SIDES TO THE TORY, RIGHT?

ON THE ONE HAND, THE BILL THAT WENT HAD HER DESK SAYS USING THEY BENEFITS AND PROGRAMS YOU COULDN'T BUY SODA WHICH ARE NOT GOOD FOR YOU, NOT HEALTHY AND THE ARGUMENT FOR THAT IS IT'S NOT GOOD FOR FAMILIES, WE SHOULD MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE GETTING NUTRITION WITH THIS PROGRAM.

AND THAT WE ARE HELPING THEM NOT LETTING PEOPLE FUEL LIKE BAD THINGS.

BUT WHEN THE GOVERNOR VETOED IT SHE SAID, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO CREATE LIKE A DIFFERENT CLASS OF CITIZENS AND TELL PEOPLE WHAT THEY ARE BUYING GROCERIES WHAT THEY ARE AND ARE NOT ALLOWED TO BUY.

WHICH IS SO INTERESTING IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE I AM LIKE IF I CLOSE MY EYES AND HEARD THAT I WOULD ASSUME A REPUBLICAN WAS SAYING IT TO ME.

DON'T TELL ME WHAT TO EAT, OR BUY IF I WANT TO KILL MYSELF WITH BAD FOODS I WILL DO IT IN MY OWN HOME.

NO, IT'S THE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR SAYING IT.

REPUBLICANS SAYING, COME ON, BIG GOVERNMENT TELL THESE PEOPLE WHAT THEY CAN AND CAN'T BUY AT THE GROCERY STORE.

>> UNDER CLASS OF GROCERY SHOPPERS AND LIMITING THEIR PURCHASING POWER AS CAMRYN MENTIONED.

>> THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE HEARD FROM DEMOCRATS ALL ALONG IS THIS BILL HAS GONE THROUGH IT'S LIKE ALL RIGHT, LIKE, THESE PEOPLE ARE RELYING ON THESE FOOD STAMPS BUT LET'S NOT TELL THEM YOU CAN'T ENJOY A SODA EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE BECAUSE YOU NEED THIS ASSISTANCE TO GET YOUR FOOD.

AND THIS IS WHAT THE OTHER PORTION OF THE GOVERNOR'S VETO LETTER FOCUS MORE ON FOOD ACCESS BECAUSE A LOT OF THESE FOLKS WHO RELY ON SNAP BENEFITS ALSO LIVE IN FOOD DESERT WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO FRESH FOOD.

LET'S FOCUS MORE ON BRINGING THE FOOD AND GIVING THEM THAT OPTION THAN TAKING AWAY THE OTHER OPTIONS THEY HAVE.

>> THE OTHER ORIGINAL BILL WAS CANDY AND OTHER THINGS BUT THEY WERE TAKING OUT BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO STREAMLINE IT AND GET IT DOESN'T AND IT DIDN'T GET DONE.

>> THEY WANTED TO GET IT DONE, BUT THERE WAS ALSO A BIG PROBLEM THE WAY THEY DEFINED CANDY WRAPPED IN THINGS LIKE GRANOLA BARS, WHICH, YOU KNOW, ARE CERTAINLY MORE HEALTHY THAN A SNICKERS BAR WOULD BE.

BUT ARE KIND OF MAYBE STRADDLE THAT LINE BETWEEN FOOD THAT'S GOT NUTRITIONAL VALUE AND FOOD THAT IS, YOU KNOW, LADEN WITH A LOT OF SUGARS AND PROCESSED FOODS.

AND SO THEY PULLED THAT OUT AS A WAY TO ESSENTIALLY NOT CAST AS WIDE OF A NET ULTIMATELY DIDN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

>> SPEAKING OF ULTRA PROCESSED FOODS THE GOVERNOR DID NOT VETO THAT BILL.

>> I WAS HOPING YOU WOULD MENTION, TALKING WITH THE KIDS ONE?

>> YES.

>> THE SAME BREATH OR WEEK ANYWAY, SHE SIGNED A BILL THAT SAYS, WITH SCHOOL LUNCHES, THEY CAN'T GIVE KIDS CERTAIN THINGS LIKE RED DIE 40.

IS ONE OF THEM.

BASICALLY INGREDIENTS THAT ARE POTENTIALLY ARMFUL OR IN THE FOODS THAT ARE NOT VERY GOOD FOR YOU.

LIKE FLAVORINGS AND DIES FOR CANDIES AND LEAPING LIKE THAT.

AND THAT ONE PASSED AND HAD SUPPORT.

AND SOME OF YOUR CRITICS ARE SAYING THEY ARE SCRATCHING THEIR HEADS BECAUSE THEY ARE CON FLARING TWO THINGS WHY IS SHE SUPPORTING ONE AND WHO NOT THE OTHER I THINK THERE IS A DIFFERENCE THERE.

I THINK IT'S MAYBE NOT QUITE FAIR TO SAY THAT IT'S THE EXACT SAME ISSUE.

AND HER GOING TWO DIFFERENT WAYS SHE HAD A REASON WITH THAT.

WITH SCHOOL LUNCHES THE DEMOCRATS WERE THANKS BRINGING THIS UP 15 YEARS AGO, MICHELLE OBAMA.

NOT YOU REPUBLICANS WHO HATED IT MICHELLE OBAMA.

REPUBLICANS ARE GOING STOP TALKING ABOUT IT.

>> THE DIFFERENT WITH THIS ONE YOU ARE NOT JUST TELLING PEOPLE YOU CAN'T RECEIPT A WHOLE LAS OF SOMETHING.

A LOT OF THESE UP GIND YESTERDAY ARE IN PROCESSED FOODS AS A WHAT LEGAL GENERALLY THERE WAS A SHIFT IN SCHOOLS TOWARDS BIG FOOD CON GLOM LET'S PROVIDING FOOD FOOD AND I REMEMBER THE BAGGED BURRITOS BEEF DIPPERS WAS SERVED AT MY PHOENIX EL BUILT ARE YOU SCHOOL.

HEAT ED IN THE MICROWAVE AND THROWN AT US AND WE GOBBLED THEM UP.

SO THERE IS KIND OF A DESIRE TO MOVE TOWARDS HEALTHIER FOODS BACK WHEN SCHOOLS WERE PREPARING KIND OF THE FOODS ON SITE.

NOW, THAT WOULD ALSO REQUIRE A LOT OF MONEY.

SO THIS IS ONE WAY OF GETTING SOME OF THOSE INGREDIENTS OUT OF THERE.

BUT NOT PROVIDING THE FUNNELED FIGURE YOU WANT TO TRULY BRING HEALTHIER NUTRITIOUS FOOD INTO SCHOOLS IT'S NOT PROVIDING THE FUNNELED TO GO DO THAT.

>> INTERESTING YOU MENTIONED THE FUNDING, WAYNE, BECAUSE JUST LAST MORE THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION CANCELED A WHOLE BILLS BILL I DON'T THINK OF DOLLARS IN GRANTS AND MONEY THAT WENT TO STATES FOR TWO THINGS, FOOD BANKS TO HELP FOOD BANKS BUY LOCAL PRODUCE FROM LOCAL FARMERS AND FOR SCHOOLS TO DO THAT.

IN ARIZONA I THINK LOST $21 MILLION TOTAL.

13, 14 MILLION OF THAT WAS FOR SCHOOLS TO BE ABLE TO BUY FRESH PRODUCE, THINGS THAT ARE GROWN LOCALLY INSTEAD OF HAVING TO TURN TO THE BIG FOOD CONGLOMERATES AND HAVE TO BUY ULTRA PROCESSED FOODS THEY COULD BUY VEGETABLES AND BEANS AND BREADS AND STUFF LIKE THAT FROM LOCAL PURCHASE SAYERS.

>> YEAH.

THAT'S KEEP IT ON THE VETO TRAIN HERE SINCE THAT'S THE THEME OF THE PROGRAM.

THE GOVERNOR ALSO VETOED HOW MANY WATER BILLS FROM?

DID I SEE SEVEN?

>> SEVEN IS WHAT I WROTE HOPEFULLY THAT'S TRUE.

>> WHAT IS THAT ALL ABOUT?

>> THESE ARE A HANDFUL OF ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY REPUBLICAN BILLS, ALL -- SOME HAVE HAD BY BED SOON PART BUT MOST PARTY LINES TO DEAL WITH GROUND WATER ISSUES.

IF YOU KNOW GAME GRIFFIN SHE'S A POWERFUL FIGURE AT THE CAPITOL.

HEAD OF THE NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE HAS A LOT OF POWER OVER WHAT GETS PASSED AND HELD BACK OVER WATER ISSUES AND SHE'S NOTORIOUS FOR BEING AHEAD SHOTS WITH THE GULF ORE THAT.

HOBBS VETOED ALL OF HER BILLS SAYING THESE ARE DOING NOTHING JUST MINUSCULE CHANGES IN LEGISLATION AND/OR GO AGAINST WATER PROTECTIONS.

>> I THINK SHE USED THE WORDS POINTLESS AND TRIVIAL.

>> IN A WAY IT'S GAME GRIFFIN GETTING A TASTE OF HER OWN MENTION AS CAMRYN MENTIONED.

GRIFFIN LAS VETOED MORE WATER BILLS LIE NOT ALLOWING THEM INTO HER COMMITTEE AND NOT JUST DEMOCRATIC BILLS BUT FELLOW REPUBLICANS WHO WANTED DIFFERENT MANAGEMENT TYPE RULES TO GO INTO PLACE IN RURAL ARIZONA AND DIDN'T LET THEM HAVE A WHAT EVERYTHING FOR YEARS SHE HAS BLOCKED ANY BILL THAT DOESN'T ALIGN WITH HER POINT OF VIEW ON HOW WATER SHOULD BE MANAGED HAS NOT MADE IT THROUGH HER COMMITTEE.

>> THE GOVERNOR SAYS SHE'S TILL PUSHING FOR BIPARTISAN WALLER POLICY.

IS THAT GOING TO HAPPEN?

>> I DON'T KNOW.

I THINK THAT THAT'S KIND OF BEEN LIKE AUSTRALIA LAB CHASING THE WHITE WHALE FOR A WHILE NOW.

I THINK WATER IS A COUPLE OF PROBLEMS.

IT'S REALLY COMPLICATED AND I THINK THAT THE STAKEHOLDERS ARE SO DEPENDENT ON THE RULES, YOU KNOW, BEING CRAFT ED IN A WAY THAT BENEFIT THEM AND NOT CHANGING THE RULES IN A WAY THAT ARE GOING TO GO HAIR WAY.

AGRICULTURE, CITIES, WHETHER IT'S RURAL ARIZONANS WITH WELLS, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WITH GROUND WATER RIGHTS, ALL OF THIS.

IT'S COMPLICATED.

IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT.

THE LAST TIME THAT THE STATE DID A REAL -- DID THE MAJOR OVER HALL OF ITS WATER LAWS IS WHEN WE CREATE THE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT ACT WHICH WAS 1980.

WE HAVE 45 YEARS ON FROM THAT.

AND THEY ABSOLUTELY NEED TO BE -- THESE CHANGES NEED TO HAPPEN IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THE WORLD HAS IT IS NOW VERSUS THE WORLD AS IT WAS IN 1980.

BUT GETTING THERE IS -- HAS PROVEN TO BE INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT.

>> THE IF GAME GRIFFIN IS BLOCKING SO MUCH STUFF AND HAS DONE FOR YEARS AND WE'VE HEARD ABOUT IT ON THE PROGRAM IN A VARIETY YOU HAVE WAYS.

IS THAT A PLUS WHO DON'T WANT TO SEE MORE REGULATION OR A MINUS FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO SEE REGULAR DAYS EASE THED?

WHAT IS GOING TO THE WATER DEBATE?

>> SHE IS AT THE TABLE SOME IN SENSE OF THE WORLD.

SHE'S MOST LOW KNOWN FOR REPRESENTING THE AGRICULTURE INDUSTRY.

THEY ARE GET VILIFIED BECAUSE THEY ARE BIG USER AND SUCKING UP A LOT OF WITHOUT.

SHE WANT TO PUT THE KIBOSH ON ANYTHING THAT CUTS DOWN ON THEIR ECONOMY.

THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT COIN IS AT SOME POINT IF YOU DON'T RESTRICT IT AND WE RUN OUT OF WATER WE HAVE NO OTHER OPTION.

SO HOBBS WANTS SOMETHING MORE SUBSTANTIAL.

IN TERMS OF WHAT IT HAPPEN I HAVE A SNAKY FEELING IT'S NOT AS CLOSE AS PEOPLE HAVE INDICATED THAT THEY ARE TO A DEAL.

LIKE ON RURAL GROUND WATER ALTERNATIVES AND AFFECT G TO YOU ARE BEGAN SOME BIG WATER ISSUES I DON'T THINK IT'S LIKE THAT CLOSE YET.

>> DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT?

>> YOU CAN SEE THAT -- TO THAT FIND YOU CAN SEE THAT THROUGH THE PLETHORA OF EXECUTIVE ORDERS AND LEGAL CHALLENGES THAT WE ARE SEEING WHICH IS TYPICALLY THE METHOD OF LEAST RESISTANCE WHEN YOU CAN'T GET SOMETHING DONE THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS.

>> RIGHT.

WAYNE STICKING WITH YOU, A COUPLE OF OTHER VETOES ONE INVOLVING CELLPHONES IN SCHOOLS.

>> A COUPLE OF THE BILLS GOING THROUGH WITH CELLPHONES IN SCHOOLS TRYING TO STOP STUDENTS FROM USING THEM.

RESTRICT THEM FROM USING THEM.

I BELIEVE THE GOVERNOR SIGNED ONE THAT ALLOWED -- >> SHE DID.

I AM SORRY SHE DID SIGN ONE.

>> THAT NOT A COMPLETE BAN IN SCHOOLS BUT REQUIRES SCHOOLS TO CRACK DOWN ON THE USE, SO BASICALLY LIMITING STUDENT USE AND THEN SOME EXCEPTIONS FOR EMERGENCY SITUATIONS WHERE THEY HAVE TO GET AHOLD OF THEIR PARENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT, YEAH, THE DEBATE HAS BEEN GOING ON AT THE CAPITOL FOR A WHILE NUMBER ONE CELLPHONES NOT GREAT FOR MEN THE HEALTH, SOCIAL MEET THAT NOT GREAT FOR HEALTH.

WHEN KIDS ARE IN SCHOOLS LET'S HAVE THEM BE IN SCHOOLS.

THEY COULD GO BACK TO WHAT MY SCHOOL USED WHEN I WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL ALL THE BUILDINGS WERE MADE OUT OF TIN SHOW SO WE DID HE WANT GET SERVE.

>> IT'S HEARING A LOT OF ABOUT YOUR HIGH SCHOOL YEARS, IT'S FASCINATING.

LET'S GET BACK TO VETOES.

CAN YOU FEEL VEHICLE SEEN BILLS WERE VETOED.

>> ONE SCHOOL-RELATED VACCINE BILLS.

ONE OF THEM WOULD HAVE REQUIRED SCHOOLS TO TELL PARENTS GIVE THEM PROACTIVE GIVE THEM TO INFORMATION SAYING, HERE IS WHAT YOU CAN SAY OR HERE IS THE REASONS YOU CANNOT VACCINATE YOUR KIDS AND STILL ABLE TO SEND THEM TO SCHOOL.

OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, DESIGNED TO GET MORE PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, TO HAVE FEWER PEOPLE VACCINATING THEIR KIDS AND GIVE MORE PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, THE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT THE LAW ALLOWS AND THE GOVERNOR VETOED THAT.

SAYING IT'S ABOUT PUB APPROXIMATE I CAN HEALTH.

WE WANT KIDS TO BE VACCINATED AND WE ALREADY HAVE EXCEPTIONS THEY EXIST IN STATE LAW.

AND WE DON'T KNOW NEED TO DO THIS.

>> THE EXCEPTION IS ALREADY IN PLACE IS WHAT SHE MENTIONED HERE.

GOVERNOR SEEMS OPEN ON THE POURED ARE PLAN A SIX-FOOT KIND OF BUFFER ZONE WAS, WHAT IS THAT ALL ABOUT, WAYNE?

>> THE GOVERNOR GO AHEAD FOR A LONG TIME SHE'S WILLING TO WORK WITH THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WHEN IT COMES TO BORDER SECURITY AND KEEPING ARIZONA SAFE.

IT'S UNCLEAR FOR ME IN WHAT WAYS SHE'S WILLING TO WORK.

SHE'S IT SAID AND TALKED ABOUT IT.

AND DONE HER OWN POLICIES IN TERMS OF SENDING MONEY FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO KIND OF DEAL WITH THE EFFECTS OF SOME NEGATIVE EFFECTS DEALING WITH BORDER SECURITY.

DRUG TRAFFICKING.

HUMAN TRAFFICKING, THAT KIND OF THING.

WHEN IT COMES TO ACTUALLY COMPLYING WITH WHAT DONALD TRUMP WANTS TO DO I HAVEN'T SEEN MUCH OF THAT COOPERATION BEYOND WHAT SHE'S SAYING WHICH IS A GOOD POLITICAL MOVE IN A STATE LOVE ARIZONA NOT SURE WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE FOR HER TO COOPERATE WITH THE ADMINISTRATION ON THAT.

>> SHE WANTS TO -- HER OFFICE SAYS THEY WANT TO ENSURE IT'S ABOUT GENUINE BORDER SECURITY.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

>> SEEMS VAGUE TO ME.

BUT AS WAYNE SAID I THINK IT'S PRUDENT FOR HER SHE'S OBJECT NUTS JUSTICE CUTLY NOT OUT WITH A TOOLBOX BUILDING THE WALL HERSELF SHE HAS NOT SAID DEFINITIVELY SHE WAIL STOP THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION FROM ANYTHING THEY WANT TO DO ON THE BORDER THINK SHE'S KEEPING AN OPEN MIND AND WHEN IT CAME TO THE RECENT DECLARATIONS SHE'S SAYING THAT SHE'S IN THE TOTALLY OPPOSED TO TO.

WE DEPENDING ON EXACTLY THE SPIKES WHAT HAVE THEY ARE GOING TO DO.

AND I THINK THAT HASN'T COMPLETELY COME OUT YET WE DON'T KNOW LIKE EVERY ELEMENT.

PLAN THAT SHE IS IS & IS NOT OKAY WITH.

>> ONE OF THE SPECIFICS IS RESPECT FOR TRIBAL LAND I THINK THAT WAS A BIG PLUS FOR THE GOVERNOR.

>> YES AND, THERE IS A LOT OF TRIBAL LAND ALONG THE SOUTHERN BOARD NEVER ARIZONA, THE TONE A ODUM NATION IN PARTICULAR HAS A COUPLE OF HUNDRED MILES OF BORDERLAND DOWN THERE.

TRUMP EXECUTIVE ORDER DID NOT APPLY TO TRIBAL LANDS FOR OBVIOUS REASONS THEY ARE SOVEREIGN NATIONS.

>> POLITICAL CALCULUS OF THIS MOVE IS THIS JUST HER SAYING SEE, BORDER SECURITY?

>> I THINK SO.

THIS IS POLITICS AND I THINK THEY'LL TRY TO THREAD THE NEEDLE OF LIKE WAYNE WAS SAYING, SAYING THE RIGHT THINGS AND MAKING IT SEEM ON SURFACE LEVEL LIKE THEY ARE ON BOARD WITH SOME OF THESE -- THE MORE INNOCUOUS THINGS THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WANTS TO DO BUT WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO WHAT SHE WILL DO ACTIVELY, I THINK THAT'S WHERE -- I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE RUB MIGHT BE AND WHERE MAYBE SOME OF THE ACTIONS MIGHT NOT JIBE 100 PERCENT WITH WHAT THEY ARE SAYING.

>> I MEAN, KAO*PGT MIGHT MEAN WE ARE NOT SEEING TO STOP THEM.

EVAN ATTORNEY GENERAL WHO SEEMS MORE THAN WILLING TO FILE THE SUITS ON THE STATE'S BEHALF.

>> CAMRYN OUR LAST TOPIC IS THE KARI LAKE UPDATE.

APPARENTLY SHOWS NOT RUNNING FOR OFFICE IN IOWA.

>> OR ANYWHERE ELSE POSSIBLY.

>> POSSIBLY.

>> YEAH.

SO THERE WAS SOME SPECULATION ABOUT THAT.

BECAUSE HER INITIAL GIG AT THE VOICE OF AMERICA SORT OF DIDN'T HASN'T AND THEN SHE HAD THE ONE WITH THE OVERSEEING AGENCY.

AND OF COURSE, RECENTLY I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT THE STATE DEPARTMENT.

BUT THERE WAS ALWAYS SPECULATION EVER SINCE THE SENATE RACE ABOUT WHETHER SHE WOULD RUN AGAIN IN ARIZONA OR IN IOWA BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE SHE IS FROM.

AND I BELIEVE THERE WAS AN OPENING BECAUSE THE IOWA GOVERNOR IS NOT GOING TO RUN AGAIN.

>> JOANIE ERNST THE IDEA WAS TO PRIMARY JOANIE ERNST BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY AGREE WITH DONALD TRUMP AND THAT HAS APPARENTLY FLOWN AWAY.

>> KARI LAKE'S SUPPOSE CERTAIN SAYS IT'S NOT HAPPENING SHE'S NOT RUNNING FOR OFFICE IN IOWA ON ARIZONA AND COMMITTED TO HELPING TRUMP WHERE SHE WAS WE'LL SEE WHAT THAT MEANS.

>> I SAW THAT RON HANSEN ARIZONA REPUBLIC HAD CAMPAIGN REPORTS AND SHE STILL OWNS A LOT OF MONEY.

>> SHE'S BEEN GATHERING UP A LOT OF DEBT WHICH, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE SHE HAS TO PAY IT BACK WHIRL WILL SEE PAY IT BACK, WHO KNOWS?

WE DON'T KNOW WHETHER SHE -- THEY SAID SHE'S NOT RUNNING RIGHT NOW.

THAT'S NOT GOING TO STOP HER FROM GETTING OUT THERE.

AND RUNNING EVENTUALLY AND RAISING MORE MONEY AND PAYING OFF THAT DEBT AND ALSO AS ALL POLITICAL REPORTERS KNOW WHO SUBSCRIBE NO THESE EMAIL LISTS NOT RUNNING FOR OFFICE DOESN'T STOP PEOPLE FROM SENDING OUT FUNDRAISING EMAILS FOR THEIR CAMPAIGN ACCOUNTS.

>> YEA OR NEIGH, JIM, I GOTTA GET A YEA OR NEIGH.

IS THERE A POLITICAL FUTURE IN ARIZONA FOR KARI LAKE?

>> I DON'T THINK RIGHT NOW THERE IS.

IF SHE TAKES A CYCLE OR TWO OFF.

AND COMES BACK, MORE WHOSE.

>> HE IS KIND OF A YEA OR NAY.

THAT'S IT FOR NOW, I AM TED SIMONS, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US, YOU HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND.

♪♪ ♪♪ >> SUPPORT INTO ARIZONA PBS COMES FROM VIEWERS LIKE YOU AND FROM.