This post is a copy of a response to a heated email I received from an angry constituent when he learned of my "No" vote on HB 2573.
I stand by my decision to vote against this bill (HB 2573) and will continue to do all that I can to make sure this bill never sees the light of day. It is unfortunate that you did not call me as I requested. I am extremely confident that I would have made myself clear when explaining why Jerry Weiers and all who voted for this bill did the hunters, sportsman, and nature-lovers a grave disservice by supporting this horrid piece of legislation. I do not think that the bill would have had as much support if Jerry Weiers did not mislead other legislators by telling them that the NRA was going to “weight” the bill & use it on their legislative scorecard. I found this to be untrue when I spoke with an NRA rep who was aware of the false information being spread by Mr. Weiers.
While I do have my doubts that licensing fees generated will actually be used for their intended purposes, I can live with this portion of the bill. I have two ATVs and ride regularly around LHC, both on and off road with friends and family and have little qualms about paying these fees and applaud their purpose. If Jerry Weiers bill stopped there, more than likely, I would have voted yes. But, Weiers bill venture far into dangerous territory and it is unconscionable my colleagues voted for its passage.
The text of the bill states that criminal action includes:
Damage to the environment: excessive pollution of air, water, or land.
Abuse of the watershed, cultural or natural resources.
Impairment of plant or animal life.
In another portion of the bill, the text includes:
Damage to:
Wildlife habitat
Riparian Areas
Cultural or Natural Resources
Property or Improvements
Now, this sounds great, right? I agree that it does. We need to preserve our beautiful desert landscape, our natural resources, the flora and fauna. I cannot argue that but...
what constitutes damage? What constitutes abuse of a watershed? When, as a lawmaker, I vet bills as great as they sound and as much as I agree with the bill's intent I must ask questions. One of the questions almost always asked is
"are the terms defined?" Will a sportsman who is out enjoying a ride be able to ascertain if he/she is breaking the law? Under the provisions of this bill, I do not think so. No one I spoke with could.
Even testimony from Game and Fish representatives brought to light that they could not define these terms but that they "would know it when they see it." The enforcement of this bill would be entirely too subjective for me, especially when times are tight and every agency budget is fighting for cash. I was elected to protect the rights of citizens.
This bill undermines those rights by not providing enough information so that law abiding citizens can continue to remain law abiding citizens. I can only imagine when budget times continue to tighten that enforcement agencies will step up efforts to ticket & fine unsuspecting, otherwise upstanding individuals in order to pad their budget. I will not let that happen. You find that disappointing? I am disappointed you think so.
D***n, I hope that you can remember the reality that my name is on almost every pro-2nd Amendment piece of legislation sponsored since I took office in 2004. I am an NRA member with an A ranking as a legislator, a member of Arizona State Rifle & Pistol Association, I believe that I am even a member (or have been in the recent past) of the M%# S&*^%n Club. If you let one vote sway you, if other club members let this vote sway them, I regret that but so be it. I did not vote no on this bill arbitrarily but because that, although there is some good there is too much bad. I will regret losing your support but will not regret voting my conscious.
Most sincerely,
RepGroe
Posts
