State of the State: No-agenda Ducey
Now we know the primary reason Doug Ducey didn’t offer a second-term agenda during the campaign: He doesn’t have one. Or, at least, not much of one.
A kind way of describing Ducey’s State of the State address would be: steady as she goes.
The state’s economy is doing well. People are moving here. The finances of state government are very healthy. Don’t rock the boat.
Another word that comes to mind is: unambitious.
The boldest proposal in the speech was making a gigantic deposit in the state’s savings account.
Beefing up the state’s rainy-day fund is a prudent thing to do. But it’s hardly the sort of thing to make the toes curl with excitement.
More significant than what was in the speech was what wasn’t there.
There was no ringing endorsement of the state’s besieged charter schools, pointing out how they have driven student achievement, expanded opportunity for low-income and minority students, and the importance of entrepreneurial incentives in that success.
Instead, there was a pedestrian nod toward the benefits of school choice and an equally languid gesture toward reform.
Charter operators who think they have a hold card against destructive reforms in Ducey are probably miscalculating.
There was no call for tax reform moving toward his 2014 pledge to make income taxes as low as possible. No call to revamp the state’s K-12 education finance formula to enhance competition through backpack funding.
Since the 2014 election, in Ducey’s world, political brand management has been king. And it has been highly successful, as the thumping margin of his re-election bid documents.
But early in this legislative session, cracks in Ducey’s image of being a competent manager of state government are breaking out.
The first order of business, according to Ducey, is for the Legislature to pass his Drought Contingency Plan to keep water in Lake Mead.
But he is demanding that legislators reduce themselves to mere clerks. Just sign the paperwork, no questions asked. And, by the way, cut a check for $40 million or so. Again, no questions permitted.
The reason for the bum’s rush is that the Ducey administration blew the first attempt to craft a DCP, turning it into a power struggle between the Department of Water Resources and the Central Arizona Water Conservation District, which operates the Central Arizona Project.
There was plenty of time to develop a DCP that didn’t rely on self-emasculation by the legislative branch of state government.
Although Ducey didn’t mention it in his address, another urgent matter before the Legislature is conforming Arizona income taxes to changes made at the federal level as part of the Trump tax cut.
The federal changes were adopted in 2017. Arizona conforming to them wasn’t addressed in 2018 because Ducey didn’t want to.
Conforming would increase what the state collects, raising the question of whether to pocket the money or return it to state taxpayers somehow. That apparently wasn’t a question that Ducey’s brand managers wanted to address before the election.
However, reaching the end of a calendar year without deciding what tax is owed on income earned during it is irresponsible management.
Perhaps this is too harsh an assessment.
The electorate didn’t give Ducey a Legislature conducive to the kind of bold reforms on which he ran in 2014. A period of quiet, small-ball politics has its merits.
And small-ball politics can produce meaningful results.
Ducey’s proposal to separate the mentally disturbed from guns is too cumbersome and limited to do any good. But a more robust proposal, such as legislative Democrats have advanced in the past, might stop a mass shooting in Arizona.
If more of an emphasis on rehabilitation of the incarcerated reduces recidivism, that’s a gain in public safety. Limiting the extent to which occupational licensing is a barrier to work is a very worthwhile effort.
Harsh or not, it’s tough to escape the conclusion that Ducey is a diminished force in state policy. Not due to the rise of competitors. Oddly enough, due to his own volition.