"... a battery of reforms, including a cap on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases and several measures designed to keep frivolous lawsuits out of court ..."

The results for Texans concerned about access to medical care?

"Texas had seen new applications decline for years, but now they're up 60 percent.... Regions where specialists were difficult or impossible to find have attracted new talent. The number of insurance companies has increased from four to more than 30. That new competition has driven malpractice-insurance premiums down by up to 20 percent for some doctors."

Meanwhile, I've read my last John Grisham book. His latest effort, The Appeal, is a ridiculously one-sided rant against tort reform that presents businesses and insurance companies as pure evil and trial lawyers as noble do-gooders. Even conservative policy groups are mocked.

Arizona's failure to enact tort reform (vetoed by Gov. Napolitano) and to effectively slow illegal immigration, has huge consequences for the medical profession, raising costs and leading many doctors to look for a more hospitable place to practice medicine. Our current policy response has been to open a new medical school, which will result in educating new doctors in Arizona so they can take care of patients in places like Texas.

In addition, a former aide to conservative Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, Steven J. Duffield, will serve as Executive Director.

The idea that the nation's most popular cable news network is off-limits just because it doesn't carry the same liberal bias as other networks is ridiculous. And what Obama and Clinton are discovering when they actually do show up on Fox News is that they will be treated fairly and with civility, in addition to reaching voters they need to reach.

Of course conservative candidates are accustomed to facing adversarial and contentious reporters and news anchors whose only goal is to make them look bad.

But I do take issue with the sense of entitlement often displayed by print and media reporters for major news organizations. Political candidates have to make a decision every day about how to spend their scarce time, keeping in mind that the goal is to persuade enough people to vote for them that they can win the election.

Sometimes doing media interviews is the best way to reach the most voters. Sometimes it is not, especially if the reporter is only interested in "gotcha" journalism or if the editorial board has already made up their mind to support someone else and is merely trying to gather ammunition.

As newspaper circulation continues to plummet, and television viewing becomes more and more fragmented, and as websites, blogs and email redefine political messaging, the ability of traditional news organizations to demand constant access to candidates will give way to the recognition that the "mainstream" media is just one option among many for reaching voters.

In another sign of desperation, Drudge is reporting that Hillary Clinton will take on the "vast right-wing conspiracy" by appearing on the Bill O'Reilly show Wednesday night on Fox News. When that's through she may look worse than she does after getting knocked around in the New York Post game.

Prior to that I was in Denver for several days visiting my oldest son. Now that I'm back my posting schedule will increase!

Now that McCain will be the nominee, Santorum is singing a different tune and has even written a column explaining why conservatives should support McCain. (Ironically, one of the issues he complains about is McCain being too conservative on spending -- he says McCain was a "thorn in the side" of his efforts to get "earmarks" for Pennsylvania!)

Santorum is right to strongly support McCain now. I have already made the case why it is in the best interest of our cause to enthusiastically support McCain.

But that conclusion was available to Santorum and others during the primary season, which is why conservatives who favored other primary candidates should never have said the things they were saying about McCain at that time. I never had any problem with conservative critiques of McCain or other candidates on the issues. As I've stated before, I agree with many of those critiques (although I thought McCain critics often turned a blind eye to the conservative failings of their own favored candidates.)

But here's the problem -- when you argue that someone is "dangerous" and would "destroy the party" and then come around later to support him, you end up looking foolish and damaging your own credibility. It has to be possible in a Republican primary to argue that your candidate is better without going to such damaging rhetorical excesses against your opponents. And we now have proof that they were in fact rhetorical excesses, because the people who launched some of these blistering attacks are now coming to the conclusion that there are some pretty good reasons to get behind Sen. McCain.

Hopefully the Santorum endorsement is a sign that conservatives are finally realizing that on our core issues of national security, the sanctity of life, judges, taxes and cutting wasteful government spending, Sen. McCain is not merely the lesser of two evils, but will in fact advance the conservative agenda in significant ways.

Meanwhile, a coalition of African-American pastors held a press conference in Washington D.C. yesterday to identify an organization they view as engaging in a real genocide against blacks -- The Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

The pastors identified Planned Parenthood's tendency to locate abortion clinics in predominantly black communities, noting that black women are nearly 5 times as likely as non-blacks to have an abortion. They also noted Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger's overtly racist desire to eradicate minorities and the "unfit" through birth control and abortion.

Read the story. The press conference was prompted by recent undercover investigations in which Planned Parenthood fundraisers agreed to accept donations from those with clearly racist intent -- desiring to provide support only for abortions of black children.

While he's distancing himself from Pastor Wright, Barack Obama may want to reconsider his strong support for Planned Parenthood.

This morning at the White House Pope Benedict celebrated the unique ideas that make the United States of America a nation set apart, a shining city on a hill. The Pope connected the dots between freedom and morality, and between liberty and virtue, in a manner rarely articulated or even understood by American leaders today:

From the dawn of the Republic, America's quest for freedom has been guided by the conviction that the principles governing political and social life are intimately linked to a moral order based on the dominion of God the Creator. The framers of this nation's founding documents drew upon this conviction when they proclaimed the "self-evident truth" that all men are created equal and endowed with inalienable rights grounded in the laws of nature and of nature's God. The course of American history demonstrates the difficulties, the struggles, and the great intellectual and moral resolve which were demanded to shape a society which faithfully embodied these noble principles. In that process, which forged the soul of the nation, religious beliefs were a constant inspiration and driving force, as for example in the struggle against slavery and in the civil rights movement. In our time too, particularly in moments of crisis, Americans continue to find their strength in a commitment to this patrimony of shared ideals and aspirations.

***

Freedom is not only a gift, but also a summons to personal responsibility. Americans know this from experience – almost every town in this country has its monuments honoring those who sacrificed their lives in defense of freedom, both at home and abroad. The preservation of freedom calls for the cultivation of virtue, self-discipline, sacrifice for the common good and a sense of responsibility towards the less fortunate. It also demands the courage to engage in civic life and to bring one's deepest beliefs and values to reasoned public debate. In a word, freedom is ever new. It is a challenge held out to each generation, and it must constantly be won over for the cause of good (cf. Spe Salvi, 24). Few have understood this as clearly as the late Pope John Paul II. In reflecting on the spiritual victory of freedom over totalitarianism in his native Poland and in eastern Europe, he reminded us that history shows, time and again, that "in a world without truth, freedom loses its foundation", and a democracy without values can lose its very soul (cf. Centesimus Annus, 46). Those prophetic words in some sense echo the conviction of President Washington, expressed in his Farewell Address, that religion and morality represent "indispensable supports" of political prosperity.

We're still waiting for the border fence, but closer to home the supposedly "honorable and respectful" 9/11 Memorial has a nice big fence around it, making it difficult to "come down and see it for yourself" as the Governor suggested.

The Memorial is in the news again today as the Arizona House has passed a bill that would remove some of the most offensive inscriptions.

I've spoken in recent weeks to family members and friends of 9/11 victims, and they are still outraged and hurt by this dishonorable monstrosity. A year-and-a-half after the controversy erupted, with the Commission and the Legislature battling over proposed changes, at least the media has finally dropped the ridiculous storyline that this was simply a "manufactured election-year issue."

I have done so because I believe conservative principles of economics, national defense and social policy are in the best interests of our community, state and nation.

On the front page of today's Arizona Republic Viewpoints section is an article I wrote arguing that conservative interests will best be served by the election of Arizona Sen. John McCain to the presidency this fall.

The article appears alongside two others -- written by a press spokesman and a high school student -- extolling the virtues of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. I was not aware the Republic planned to present my column as part of a "point-counterpoint" series on the candidates. My intent was to make the case for why conservatives should support Sen. McCain.

A few lines were edited out of the printed version, including this important point:

For conservatives, supporting John McCain is not a compromise or a sell-out of our principles. He is a presidential candidate who will strengthen national security, appoint conservative judges, support the sanctity of life, keep taxes low and veto pork barrel spending. He will advance the conservative cause in significant ways.

I will be discussing the article on KFYI's Mike Broomhead show tonight at 8 p.m. (550 AM). Here is what I wrote in its entirety:

Although Sen. John McCain has locked up the Republican nomination for President, some conservative leaders continue to snipe at him. While I agree with elements of most conservative critiques of Sen. McCain, I could not possibly disagree more with their conclusions – especially if those conclusions cause conservatives to sit this election out.

Sen. McCain is not the lesser of two evils. In fact, he is worthy of the enthusiastic support of every thinking conservative.

I join many citizens in gratitude that a genuine American hero with core conservative beliefs – who has already given so much for our nation -- is willing to spend his eighth decade on earth serving a cause greater than himself.

If you are an across-the-board conservative like I am – a fiscal, social and foreign policy conservative – it is in your interest and the national interest to elect Sen. McCain.

It’s not just because either of the Democratic alternatives would jeopardize our security, our economy and our values – though they would. It is because the election of John McCain will substantially advance the conservative principles and values we’ve been fighting for.

In the interest of full disclosure, Sen. McCain endorsed me in the Republican primary for Governor in 2006, even making strong television ads on my behalf. I was honored to have his support in a contested primary that I eventually won. But he never asked me for anything in return, then or now.

I write today on my own, without the knowledge or approval of the McCain campaign. And I do so because I am concerned that some conservatives are heading down a path that will result in the destruction of every principle they claim to promote.

Foreign policy conservatives should have the least concern about McCain. He has the experience and determination to carry the battle to the enemy in what he describes as the “transcendent issue” of our time – the fight against radical Islamic extremists. He is committed to victory in Iraq, and was an early proponent of the surge that has turned the tide.

Both Democratic candidates have made promises of withdrawal that will embolden our enemies and put at risk not only our troops but also the free citizens of Iraq who have trusted us with their lives.

Social conservatives have worked for a generation to promote the unique humanity and value of every human life, and are finally winning the battle of public opinion. Sen. McCain not only has voted pro-life for more than two decades – receiving the endorsement of Arizona Right to Life in every election since 1982 – but has pledged to appoint judges who are committed to constitutional fidelity. He has fought for every conservative appointment to the high court, including Robert Bork.

When we are so close to restoring the promise of the Declaration of Independence – the “unalienable” right to life of every human child – why would any sincere pro-lifer sit this election out? Unfortunately, we know what either Democrat would do – the “litmus test” of commitment to the flawed Roe v. Wade decision is alive and well. Aging liberals on the Court will line up to let Clinton or Obama replace them with liberal justices 30 years younger – preserving Roe and other activist decisions for at least another generation.

Sen. McCain supports marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Like Fred Thompson, he opposes amending the U.S. Constitution to protect marriage unless it is absolutely necessary -- which it would be if federal courts overturn state definitions of marriage. For now, he supports state efforts to confirm marriage as the unique bond of male and female.

Economic conservatives should appreciate Sen. McCain’s lifelong quest to reduce the size and scope of government and to end pork barrel spending. He has never voted for a tax increase and is committed to making the Bush tax cuts permanent. He believes in free market solutions to health care, not the government take-over promoted by Democrats.

With a lifetime conservative voting record of 82.3 percent, Sen. McCain’s commitment to our principles stands in stark contrast to his Democratic opponents, both of whom vote conservative less than 10 percent of the time.

The suggestion by one pundit that Hillary Clinton is “more conservative” than McCain is hyperbole on steroids -- so factually wrong that it’s just plain silly.

Talk show pundits have bludgeoned us with the list of McCain’s sins against conservative orthodoxy, beginning with his immigration bill.

But consider this – even in dealing with illegal immigration, Sen. McCain’s concern for national security and his recognition of political reality will cause him to do much more to secure the borders than any Democrat. If that’s the only issue you care about, Sen. McCain is still your best hope for progress – the Democrats can’t even given a straight answer about whether they would give drivers’ licenses to illegal aliens.

I first met McCain in 1984, when he came to my office for an interview while I was the editor of ASU’s daily student newspaper. Later, in a debate at ASU, he criticized federal efforts to stop illegal immigration. Consistent with his position today, he expressed concern about rounding up and deporting people who have been here for years. But then he said, “We need to tighten up our border control.”

That’s right – all the way back in 1984, when many of us who are concerned now about illegal immigration were not even aware of the issue – John McCain was on record calling for more border security.

For conservatives, supporting John McCain is not a compromise or a sell-out of our principles. He is a presidential candidate who will strengthen national security, appoint conservative judges, support the sanctity of life, keep taxes low and veto pork barrel spending. He will advance the conservative cause in significant ways.

Every day that conservative leaders grumble and express reservations about McCain increases the likelihood that a liberal Democrat will take office next January.

Then there will be no checks on the liberal tendencies of Nancy Pelosi and a Democratic Congress. The Supreme Court will be gone for a generation. Our right to make medical decisions will be lost. Our economy will be stifled by taxes and regulation. Our border will remain wide open. And we can only pray that our pullback from the war effort does not lead to more attacks in the United States.

For conservatives, that’s an awfully high price to pay because you’re mad about campaign finance reform or a dead and buried immigration bill.

When the government provides peace and security for the people, a framework of freedom is created enabling citizens to provide for their own needs without governmental interference.

Check the headlines this month – we still live in a dangerous world.

READ MORE

The Arizona Legislature has passed a prohibition on the practice modeled after the federal law upheld by the Supreme Court. The bill awaits Gov. Napolitano's signature.

Please take a moment to use The Center for Arizona Policy's easy email form to encourage Gov. Napolitano to sign this bill.

Earlier this week the Governor received an award for her commitment to Arizona's children. I have no doubt that Gov. Napolitano's concern for abused children is genuine and heartfelt. Please respectfully encourage her to extend her passion to protect children from harm to children who are being born -- particularly if you are one of her supporters. This is an issue that should unite everyone.

Kind of makes you wish they'd had You Tube back when Bill Clinton was telling those whoppers. It appears politicians will no longer be able to bank on the famously short memories of American voters.

But despite a nearly $2 billion deficit, as Republic columnist Bob Robb put it recently, "Gov. Janet Napolitano's approach to revenue crunches is to preserve spending as much as possible."

Not everyone is whistling past the budgetary graveyard. The Republicans in the Legislature have passed a hiring freeze and a spending freeze. Both were vetoed by the Governor.

Dean Martin called a press conference to point out that the state is running out of money. The Governor insists the state Treasurer doesn't know how much money the state has. You can see her angry, eye-rolling response here.

While Gov. Napolitano accuses Dean Martin of being political, her own political strategy is obvious -- keep borrowing money, keep spending money you don't have, avoid difficult spending cut decisions, and escape into the Obama administration while leaving a big financial mess behind for the next Governor.

Now the capper - in response to the mortgage foreclosure crisis, the Governor has sent out a blast email offering "Help for Those Falling Behind" on their bills. Uh, Governor ... that would be us. And the more spending you allow, the further behind we fall.