Either the Reps don't have a clue as to how much they are crippling the state's ability to thrive in a modern society, or they've run the numbers and have figured out that they are screwed in next year's elections and have collectively decided to rampage through the tax code and social compact, wreaking as much havoc as they can before they are kicked to the electoral curb.
...Thus far, whether it's from the governor's office or from the back rooms of the lege, every idea hatched to help the state out of its fiscal mess is either short-sighted or places the burden squarely on the backs of the poor and working-class residents of Arizona.
The latest scheme from the governor - sell state assets and lease them back for continued use - would result in only a one-time benefit to the state's cash flow and a long-term degradation of the state's balance sheet (there was also talk of making the sale/lease-back into a sale/buy-back scheme, which just shifts the long-term pain back to the state's cash flow).
This is just an apt follow-up to her plan to hold a special election for raising the state's sales tax and to crack open the Voter Protection Act measures that protect certain programs and initiatives from legislative interference. Programs and initiatives that include Clean Elections, a raise in the minimum wage, statewide smoking restrictions, increased Medicaid eligibility, and education funding.
Of course, the lege is trying to out-irresponsible the governor. In addition to the attempts to further cut revenue with attacks on the state's equalization property tax (dedicated to education) and others, they're now floating a plan to "reform" the state's tax structure.
In this context, "reform" is short for a strike-everything amendment to a bill that would "slash the state's corporate and business taxes and jack up the state's sales tax." (Fact sheet on the strike-everything amendment here)
The striker was proposed for the purpose of bringing the issue up for discussion during February 23rd's meeting of the House Ways and Means Committee (meeting audio available here).
During the discussion, the Republican chair of the committee, Rep. Rick Murphy, made it clear that the only tax increase that he would support would be an increase to the ever-regressive sales tax, *and* that any increase should be matched with equal cuts to corporate and business tax rates.
Even if one ignores the fact that sales taxes (sometimes known as consumption taxes) is perhaps the most regressive tax in use (a fact that the Reps usually ignore, gleefully), the sales tax is a notoriously unreliable source of revenue, and the over-reliance on it has contributed greatly to AZ's budget crisis.
It wouldn't be surprising if Brewer finds that the lege's price for signing off on a special election to raise the sales tax is Brewer's signature on a bill to cut business taxes.
If that is the situation, while there's no guarantee that any special election questions will pass, no matter what happens the state will be worse off.
That is *not* what any of them -Brewer or the lege - were hired for.
Actually, on review of the opening paragraph, there is a third option -
They know how much damage they are causing, are proud of it, and believe that their rampage is the ticket to remain in office.
That's truly scary.
Later...
David Safier's take on recent developments is available at Blog for Arizona here.
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Join The Weekend Protest Against Arpaio
From a press release from the Arizona Advocacy Network -
Zack de la Rocha of Rage Against the Machine calls on fans to join him in marching against Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s human and civil rights violations
Will lead Noche Cultural/Open Mic on Fri. 2/27, March in Phoenix, AZ on Sat. 2/28
PHOENIX, AZ --Zack de la Rocha of the internationally renowned rock band Rage Against the Machine has gigs in Phoenix this Friday and Saturday. But instead of standing on a stage he will be marching with people from all over the country who are asking the federal government to revoke Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s 287(g) agreement and stop the raids of workplaces and immigrant neighborhoods. The 287(g) agreements allow local law enforcement to arrest people if they are suspected of being in the U.S. without proper documents.
"To witness what is happening in Arizona and remain neutral is to be implicated in human rights violations that are occurring right here on US soil against migrants. History will not be kind to Joe Arpaio,” de la Rocha said, “He will be remembered with other infamous sheriffs like Bull Connor who subjugated and terrorized communities for shortsighted political gain. I hope everyone will join me in protesting Sheriff Joe."
"Recently the nation witnessed the ritual humiliation of migrants in a spectacle evocative of some of the most horrific episodes of human history," explains Pablo Alvarado, Director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network. "People across the country are outraged at the shameful violations of human rights perpetrated by the Maricopa County Sheriffs and they are being moved to action."
In the last month Sheriff Joe Arpaio intensified his on-going escalation of attacks against Latinos by segregating the county jail and parading undocumented migrants shackled in a chain-gang into "tent city." He erected and surrounded the tent with an electric fence in a grotesque display of human degradation.
The march is being organized by the National Day Laborers Organizing Network, Puente, Somos America/We Are America Coalition of Arizona, Arizona Advocacy Network and others at the request of groups all over the country that want to publicly denounce Sheriff Arpaio’s actions.To get marchers pumped up, de la Rocha will be headlining a Noche Cultural / open mic at Tonatierra, 802 N. 7th Street in Phoenix from 8pm to Midnight on Friday
2/27. For more information go to this Facebook page, or contact us at StopTheRaids@azadvocacy.org.WHAT:- Noche Cultural / Open Mic with Zach de la Rocha of Rage Against the Machine, Fri. 2/27 8pm to Midnight at 802 N. 7th St.-
March with Zach from Steele Indian School Park at 9am on Sat. 2/28.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
So how's that whole "lowering taxes creates jobs" thing working out?
On Monday evening, over 300 people met at ASU to speak to members of the Democratic caucus of the lege about the devastation caused by the Republican cuts to human services and education in Arizona. Cuts brought on by plummeting state revenue.
Coincidentally, earlier in the day, the House Ways and Means Committee considered further reducing revenue by passing HB2073, a proposal to repeal the state's equalization property tax, a source of revenue devoted to funding education. The committee passed the measure on a 5 - 3 party-line vote, with Reps voting to further cut revenue while the state is in a massive fiscal hole (Republican mantra - "There's no hole you can't make bigger").
Most of the big names in the Big Business Lobbyists - Arizona Chapter showed up to make certain their apologists on the committee (Reps. Andy Biggs, Debbie Lesko, Rick Murphy, Michelle Reagan, Steve Yarbrough) toed the party (and company!) line.
From the AZ Republic article linked above -
{start tired cliche}
In fact, they shamelessly harped on that talking point many times, clinging to it as a drowning man clings to a life preserver.
{end tired cliche} :))
Anyway, their repeated pounding on that point made me wonder.
The equalization tax that they want to permanently repeal has been suspended for three years. Surely there's going to be some evidence by now of a direct correlation between "no equalization tax for education" and "increased employment."
Right?
A quick search of the website of federal Bureau of Labor Statistics provides an answer to that question. (Arizona summary page here.)
In December of 2006, immediately prior to the suspension of the equalization tax, there were
2,888,648 people employed in Arizona;
In December of 2008, that number had risen to 2,945,861, an increase of 57,213.
That proves McCarthy's point, and the point of every Rep in the lege, right?
Not so much.
What that simple comparison doesn't show is that over the same period, the employable workforce also increased, by 159,806. In other words 64% of new workers haven't found jobs, and that statistic bears out in the changes in the state's unemployment rate.
In December 2006, the unemployment rate in AZ was 3.9%; in December 2008, it was 6.9%.
Let's be clear - since the equalization tax was suspended, Arizona's unemployment rate has increased 77%.
Another figure that illustrates just how bad the economy has gotten since the suspension of the equalization tax is the increase in Mass Layoff Events (50+ people laid off from one employer) -
In December 2006, there were 4 MLEs in AZ; by December 2008, that number had risen to 13.
Additionally, last month, there were 24 Mass Layoffs in Arizona.
And there will be still more in February (I know this because my company just had one at the beginning of the month, and is almost certain to have another by the end of spring. If not sooner.)
I know that regular commenter Thane or perhaps somebody from ATRA will point out that I provided no evidence directly linking the suspension of the equalization tax and the increase in the state's unemployment rate.
To that I will respond "Perhaps not, but neither have you provided a evidence of a direct link between defunding public education and increased job opportunities."
Later...
Coincidentally, earlier in the day, the House Ways and Means Committee considered further reducing revenue by passing HB2073, a proposal to repeal the state's equalization property tax, a source of revenue devoted to funding education. The committee passed the measure on a 5 - 3 party-line vote, with Reps voting to further cut revenue while the state is in a massive fiscal hole (Republican mantra - "There's no hole you can't make bigger").
Most of the big names in the Big Business Lobbyists - Arizona Chapter showed up to make certain their apologists on the committee (Reps. Andy Biggs, Debbie Lesko, Rick Murphy, Michelle Reagan, Steve Yarbrough) toed the party (and company!) line.
From the AZ Republic article linked above -
Joining the chamber in supporting House Bill 2073 were Pinnacle West Capital Corp., the National Federation of Independent Business, the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties and the Arizona Manufacturers Council. Representatives from the Arizona Tax Research Association and Americans for Tax Reform also supported the bill.I listened to the recording of the meeting (available here; due to technical difficulties, no video is available). One of the most vocal supporters of HB2073 was Kevin McCarthy of the Arizona Tax Research Association. He (and Biggs, Yarbrough, and Murphy, his parrots on the committee) stressed that lowering taxes would create jobs.
{start tired cliche}
In fact, they shamelessly harped on that talking point many times, clinging to it as a drowning man clings to a life preserver.
{end tired cliche} :))
Anyway, their repeated pounding on that point made me wonder.
The equalization tax that they want to permanently repeal has been suspended for three years. Surely there's going to be some evidence by now of a direct correlation between "no equalization tax for education" and "increased employment."
Right?
A quick search of the website of federal Bureau of Labor Statistics provides an answer to that question. (Arizona summary page here.)
In December of 2006, immediately prior to the suspension of the equalization tax, there were
2,888,648 people employed in Arizona;
In December of 2008, that number had risen to 2,945,861, an increase of 57,213.
That proves McCarthy's point, and the point of every Rep in the lege, right?
Not so much.
What that simple comparison doesn't show is that over the same period, the employable workforce also increased, by 159,806. In other words 64% of new workers haven't found jobs, and that statistic bears out in the changes in the state's unemployment rate.
In December 2006, the unemployment rate in AZ was 3.9%; in December 2008, it was 6.9%.
Let's be clear - since the equalization tax was suspended, Arizona's unemployment rate has increased 77%.
Another figure that illustrates just how bad the economy has gotten since the suspension of the equalization tax is the increase in Mass Layoff Events (50+ people laid off from one employer) -
In December 2006, there were 4 MLEs in AZ; by December 2008, that number had risen to 13.
Additionally, last month, there were 24 Mass Layoffs in Arizona.
And there will be still more in February (I know this because my company just had one at the beginning of the month, and is almost certain to have another by the end of spring. If not sooner.)
I know that regular commenter Thane or perhaps somebody from ATRA will point out that I provided no evidence directly linking the suspension of the equalization tax and the increase in the state's unemployment rate.
To that I will respond "Perhaps not, but neither have you provided a evidence of a direct link between defunding public education and increased job opportunities."
Later...
Arpaio's mantra - "It's everybody else's fault"
A prisoner escapes from Superior Court while in the custody of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, so naturally, Joe Arpaio doesn't objectively assess the incident, he just blames the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors.
From an AZ Republic story regarding the Court's efforts to examine what happened and to prevent future escapes (emphasis mine) -
Arpaio has had run-ins with the courts in the past, at times refusing to transport prisoners to their court appearances (he was slapped down quickly for that one, since that's a basic part of any sheriff's job), so it isn't surprising that the court felt it was appropriate to seek an objective analysis of what went wrong last week to ensure the safety of the public and court personnel in the future.
It's unfortunate in this time of budget crises at all levels of government that Arpaio and his lack of professionalism is causing the expenditure of more scarce resources.
And despite claims that he needs more deputies for court security, Arpaio has the option of transferring some from his anti-immigrant putsch squads.
Of course, that'll never happen - he doesn't get enough of a media coverage fix for mundane things like doing his job right.
From an AZ Republic story regarding the Court's efforts to examine what happened and to prevent future escapes (emphasis mine) -
The Maricopa County Superior Court has hired an outside consulting firm to investigate last week's escape of a convicted child rapist while he was on trial, court officials said.
Adrian Cruz was convicted in 2005 of sexually assaulting his girlfriend's 9-year-old daughter in his ice-cream truck. He was sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for 35 years. But he was back in court on trial for two unrelated rapes.
On Feb. 17, he slipped out of handcuffs during a lunchtime break and evaded the Maricopa County Sheriff's deputies who were supposed to be guarding him. His escape was captured by surveillance cameras as he walked unchallenged out of the downtown Phoenix court complex.
{snip}
"I smell some politics involved in this," Arpaio said of the consultants. "If they're not happy with the service, maybe they can hold the Board of Supervisors in contempt for not giving us the money for hiring the necessary deputies."
Arpaio has had run-ins with the courts in the past, at times refusing to transport prisoners to their court appearances (he was slapped down quickly for that one, since that's a basic part of any sheriff's job), so it isn't surprising that the court felt it was appropriate to seek an objective analysis of what went wrong last week to ensure the safety of the public and court personnel in the future.
It's unfortunate in this time of budget crises at all levels of government that Arpaio and his lack of professionalism is causing the expenditure of more scarce resources.
And despite claims that he needs more deputies for court security, Arpaio has the option of transferring some from his anti-immigrant putsch squads.
Of course, that'll never happen - he doesn't get enough of a media coverage fix for mundane things like doing his job right.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Education Rally At The State Capitol - March 4
Next Wednesday, March 4, there will be a massive rally in support of education at the State Capitol.
From the website of the Arizona Education Association -
From the website of the Arizona Education Association -
March4Schools - Sign up today!
On March 4, thousands of parents, teachers, education support professionals, and taxpayers will converge on the Capitol to demonstrate Arizona's broad and deep support for our public schools.
This rally at the Capitol will be the largest mobilization of education supporters in our state's history. AEA Education Day at the Capitol participants will be joined by thousands sharing their stories about the impact of budget cuts on education.
March4Schools
March 4
4 p.m.
Arizona Capitol
1700 West Washington
Here's the response, DSW...
...and for the record, you served up a BP fastball...
I normally don't counter-post, but since DSW at Sonoran Alliance has misrepresented what I said in an earlier post, a counter-post is an appropriate response.
Especially since DSW himself (or herself; it's an anonymous blog) chose to go the counter-post (both to me and to David Safier at Blog for Arizona) route instead of simply commenting on my original post.
The post in question criticized Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Gilbert) for rationalizing his anti-education funding vote by saying that ' "Education does not create jobs," he [Biggs] said. "Entrepreneurs and businesses create jobs." '
My response was thus - "Apparently he believes that entrepeneurs and businessmen don't need educations, nor do they need a workforce knowledgeable enough to adequately staff their businesses."
DSW's response to my criticism?
On a couple of points he is correct - having an excellent education does not guarantee one a job, nor, generally speaking, do teachers create jobs.
They just give people the tools (knowledge, ability to think critically and learn more) to create jobs or to fill those jobs adequately. In other words, they give people the tools they need to succeed in our society.
And a commenter (John) on DSW's post does bring up the success of college dropout Bill Gates and uses it as a bulwark to the argument that education isn't necessary for success.
That commenter might have had a point, except for a few things - Gates is highly intelligent, had access to oodles of investment capital via family connections (hat tip to commenter Ron on DSW's post for reminding everyone of that fact) and Gates had access to highly educated people to write Microsoft's software and do its accounting and legal work, and so forth.
Now, I'm not disparaging John's point completely - people without much formal education *can* succeed greatly if they have enough drive and intelligence (Gates is a case in point) and people with a lot of formal education and not much active intelligence can fail spectacularly (to whit: George W. Bush of the two Ivy League degrees and the lowest Presidential job approval ratings ever. To be fair to the Ivy League schools though, legacy admissions and "gentlemen's Cs don't motivate people to learn, especially when the Friends of Dad and Granddad are around to smooth the way.)
BTW - DSW should update his post - Tedski at R-Cubed is on the Biggs quote, too. :)
I normally don't counter-post, but since DSW at Sonoran Alliance has misrepresented what I said in an earlier post, a counter-post is an appropriate response.
Especially since DSW himself (or herself; it's an anonymous blog) chose to go the counter-post (both to me and to David Safier at Blog for Arizona) route instead of simply commenting on my original post.
The post in question criticized Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Gilbert) for rationalizing his anti-education funding vote by saying that ' "Education does not create jobs," he [Biggs] said. "Entrepreneurs and businesses create jobs." '
My response was thus - "Apparently he believes that entrepeneurs and businessmen don't need educations, nor do they need a workforce knowledgeable enough to adequately staff their businesses."
DSW's response to my criticism?
"Maybe this is a good time to chime in and remind our liberal bloggers that there are many highly educated Ph.D’s employed by our fine university system who could only find jobs within the university system. They have created no jobs. Simply put, having an excellent education does not guarantee you a job."
On a couple of points he is correct - having an excellent education does not guarantee one a job, nor, generally speaking, do teachers create jobs.
They just give people the tools (knowledge, ability to think critically and learn more) to create jobs or to fill those jobs adequately. In other words, they give people the tools they need to succeed in our society.
And a commenter (John) on DSW's post does bring up the success of college dropout Bill Gates and uses it as a bulwark to the argument that education isn't necessary for success.
That commenter might have had a point, except for a few things - Gates is highly intelligent, had access to oodles of investment capital via family connections (hat tip to commenter Ron on DSW's post for reminding everyone of that fact) and Gates had access to highly educated people to write Microsoft's software and do its accounting and legal work, and so forth.
Now, I'm not disparaging John's point completely - people without much formal education *can* succeed greatly if they have enough drive and intelligence (Gates is a case in point) and people with a lot of formal education and not much active intelligence can fail spectacularly (to whit: George W. Bush of the two Ivy League degrees and the lowest Presidential job approval ratings ever. To be fair to the Ivy League schools though, legacy admissions and "gentlemen's Cs don't motivate people to learn, especially when the Friends of Dad and Granddad are around to smooth the way.)
BTW - DSW should update his post - Tedski at R-Cubed is on the Biggs quote, too. :)
Republican Schmuck Alert
And no, I'm not talking about the former GOP candidate for the AZ House. :)
This is the first in an irregular series of posts, one that I expect will have unfortunately frequent entries.
Today, there are two candidates for schmuck-hood.
First up, the ever-loony Rep. Andy Biggs of Gilbert (thanks go out to David Safier at Blog for Arizona for spotting this one). From the AZ Daily Star -
Apparently he believes that entrepeneurs and businessmen don't need educations, nor do they need a workforce knowledgeable enough to adequately staff their businesses. I expect Biggs to be a regular honoree here.
Also up for consideration is State Superintendant of Public Instruction Tom Horne.
From the Yuma Sun story about the House Education Committee's vote to kill Rep. David Schapira's bill to raise the minimum age for dropping out of school to 18 -
Prior to his current gig, Horne, the chief educator in the state, was a lawyer. (Note: he's already formed a committee to "explore" running for AZ Attorney General next year.)
Prior to *his* current gig, Schapira, a member of the House Ed Committee, was a teacher.
When it comes to matters of teaching and education, that difference creates a credibility gap that only a full-blown schmuck would dive into, and dive into head first, at that.
Sad to say, but there will be more entries in this series sooner or later.
And probably sooner than later.
This is the first in an irregular series of posts, one that I expect will have unfortunately frequent entries.
Today, there are two candidates for schmuck-hood.
First up, the ever-loony Rep. Andy Biggs of Gilbert (thanks go out to David Safier at Blog for Arizona for spotting this one). From the AZ Daily Star -
"Education does not create jobs," he [Biggs] said. "Entrepreneurs and businesses create jobs."
Biggs added that it wouldn't matter whether Arizona has the best-educated work force in the country if higher taxes drive companies out of business.
Apparently he believes that entrepeneurs and businessmen don't need educations, nor do they need a workforce knowledgeable enough to adequately staff their businesses. I expect Biggs to be a regular honoree here.
Also up for consideration is State Superintendant of Public Instruction Tom Horne.
From the Yuma Sun story about the House Education Committee's vote to kill Rep. David Schapira's bill to raise the minimum age for dropping out of school to 18 -
Horne even poked some fun at Rep. David Schapira, D-Tempe, who is sponsoring the legislation.
"I think there should be a bill that says no one can propose it unless they spend a year teaching kids who don't want to be there,'' he said.
Prior to his current gig, Horne, the chief educator in the state, was a lawyer. (Note: he's already formed a committee to "explore" running for AZ Attorney General next year.)
Prior to *his* current gig, Schapira, a member of the House Ed Committee, was a teacher.
When it comes to matters of teaching and education, that difference creates a credibility gap that only a full-blown schmuck would dive into, and dive into head first, at that.
Sad to say, but there will be more entries in this series sooner or later.
And probably sooner than later.
Last night's budget forum at ASU
For nearly three emotionally-wracked hours on Monday evening, 14 members of the Democratic caucus of the state legislature listened to Arizonans tell of the devastation to their lives caused by the draconian budget cuts imposed on the state's education and human services structure.
Hosts Sen. Meg Burton-Cahill and Reps. David Schapira and Ed Ableser (all representing LD17, the home of ASU) were joined by colleagues from all over the state - Sen. Jorge Luis Garcia and Representatives Rae Waters, Kyrsten Sinema, David Lujan, Pat Fleming, Lynne Pancrazi, Daniel Patterson, Matt Heinz, Chad Campbell, Tom Chabin, and Christopher Deschene, who all graciously took the time out of their lives to visit Tempe.
While there were folks from all parts of society there, the developmentally disabled community was particularly well-, and heart-breakingly, represented.
ASU Web Devil coverage here; AZ Republic coverage here. In addition, Rep. Patterson's blog entry covering the event is here.
I'll have more later after I get the pics of the event uploaded, but Patterson's blog post touches on something I want to mention now.
On Thursday, there will be a rally at the State Capitol from 11 a.m. until 1 p.m. to support saving services for Arizona's Children with Disabilities.
Everyone is urged to attend to make your voice heard.
More later...
Edit to add (info courtesy Rep. Steve Farley's latest Farley Report):
Next Thursday, March 5, there will be a similar forum at U of A in Tucson.
Time: 6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m.
Location: U of A Student Union, South Ballroom, 1330 E. University Blvd., Tucson
Hosts Sen. Meg Burton-Cahill and Reps. David Schapira and Ed Ableser (all representing LD17, the home of ASU) were joined by colleagues from all over the state - Sen. Jorge Luis Garcia and Representatives Rae Waters, Kyrsten Sinema, David Lujan, Pat Fleming, Lynne Pancrazi, Daniel Patterson, Matt Heinz, Chad Campbell, Tom Chabin, and Christopher Deschene, who all graciously took the time out of their lives to visit Tempe.
While there were folks from all parts of society there, the developmentally disabled community was particularly well-, and heart-breakingly, represented.
ASU Web Devil coverage here; AZ Republic coverage here. In addition, Rep. Patterson's blog entry covering the event is here.
I'll have more later after I get the pics of the event uploaded, but Patterson's blog post touches on something I want to mention now.
On Thursday, there will be a rally at the State Capitol from 11 a.m. until 1 p.m. to support saving services for Arizona's Children with Disabilities.
Everyone is urged to attend to make your voice heard.
More later...
Edit to add (info courtesy Rep. Steve Farley's latest Farley Report):
Next Thursday, March 5, there will be a similar forum at U of A in Tucson.
Time: 6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m.
Location: U of A Student Union, South Ballroom, 1330 E. University Blvd., Tucson
Monday, February 23, 2009
State Rep. David Schapira: column on education and the state budget
State Representative David Schapira (D-LD17) wrote a column that was published by the Arizona Republic in Saturday's edition of the community news section in Tempe. There's no link available - I couldn't find it on their website. It was there though - I read it.)
Fortunately, however, he sent it out as part of an email reminder of tonight's budget hearing at ASU (6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m., Ventana Room (#241), Memorial Union).
From the email -
See you at tonight's hearing!
Fortunately, however, he sent it out as part of an email reminder of tonight's budget hearing at ASU (6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m., Ventana Room (#241), Memorial Union).
From the email -
Last week, in a Tempe Republic column, Editor Tom Spratt wrote that legislators owe it to constituents to share budget updates.
I couldn't agree more.
Legislative leaders have broken their promise to be open and transparent, and they have not addressed the impact of deep budget cuts to the people they will affect.
The fact is that the legislators who voted to pass the 2009 budget had not publicly discussed the impact of their decision with constituents, K-12 students, parents and teachers or with the universities.
They didn't even discuss it with legislative Democrats or rank-and-file Republicans before it was up for votes on the House and Senate floors.
Spratt wrote that legislators could do more - travel around their districts, meet with constituents, hold forums, answer questions and explain exactly what people should expect as a result of the cuts for this fiscal year and the proposals for the next fiscal year, which starts in July.
Legislative Democrats have hosted six public budget hearings in the last two months to discuss the impact of the deep budget cuts and to hear concerns of citizens in the community about the impact of the budget.
We've held these hearings in Casa Grande, Phoenix, Yuma, Tucson, Prescott and Flagstaff. Our seventh in this series will be on Monday at Arizona State University in Tempe, followed by hearings in Sierra Vista and at the University of Arizona in Tucson.
We hope to continue to hear from constituents and community members about how these cuts will impact their lives and the concerns they have about the 2010 budget.
I share the concern of many Arizonans with regard to the deep cuts to education for this fiscal year and those that are being proposed starting in July.
I have worked hard in recent weeks to get the word out about the education cuts. I meticulously detailed the proposed cuts in public Education Committee meetings and budget forums in Flagstaff, Tucson and Phoenix, and I will do so again at the public budget hearing on Feb. 23 in Tempe. At each forum, I went into great detail in publicly questioning school administrators and university presidents as to the impact of the proposed cuts on their schools.
In addition to participating in public meetings, I appeared on Channel 8's "Horizon," submitted an commentary regarding the budget to The Republic and responded to many reporter inquiries on the proposed education cuts, speaking extensively about potential impacts.
I also have made all of this information available on my website and in email updates to constituents who sign up there.
I fought hard for education on the House floor in the middle of the night, doing my best to convince my Republican colleagues that thousands of jobs will be lost and we would lose major parts of ASU, our community's economic engine. I also pleaded with them to consider the impact on student learning in our state.
I have worked hard to protect education in District 17 and in Arizona, and I always will.
I encourage all constituents to attend our public budget hearing on Monday from 6:30 to 9 p.m. at ASU's Memorial Union in Ventana Room 241. We will present detailed information on the budget and seek public comment.
Also, please take a moment to sign up on my website, www.DavidSchapira.com, to receive future budget updates and information.
State Rep. David Schapira, D-Tempe, represents District 17.
See you at tonight's hearing!
2009 Legislative Loon Award
It's been tough finding a "winner" of this year's Legislative Loon Award. The problem hasn't been a dearth of candidates, because the rightward lurch of the GOP caucus in the lege has created a surfeit of them. (And so ends this blog's Thesaurus sentence of the year :) )
As in previous years, the likes of State Sens. Russell Pearce and Jack Harper were frontrunners for this award, as was Representative John Kavanagh. In addition to their nativist enthusiasms, Pearce and Kavanagh are the chairs of their respective chambers' Appropriations Committees, and have the influence to further the more radical parts of their ideology. Harper is, well, *Harper,* the man who never met a bill or utterance too outlandish or ignorant for him to put his name to it.
In a normal year, there would be no more than one or two others in serious contention (Trish Groe will be missed...OK, not really.)
But this year, a huge percentage of their colleagues have given free rein to their inner whackjob, in ways that go beyond the usual "appeal to the wingers back home" bills that go nowhere, and were never meant to.
Before we even enter into a discussion of some of the horrific bills proposed this session, there's the "colorful" utterances of some of the legislators to consider -
- Rep. Frank Antenori, a resident of Tucson and elected to represent part of Tucson, expressed objections to newspapers designating him as "R-Tucson." Apparently, he has a problem with the "hippies" that run the city.
- Sen. Pam Gorman, from her blog, on the prospect of devastating budget cuts for education and the rest of the state's budget (emphasis mine) - "Essentially, we will get to sit around in small groups brainstorming on ways to cut government spending instead of the normal nauseating disputes about how to spend more. Yippee! Now, where’s my party hat? "
- Sen. Jack Harper, responding to a story that Arizona, the rate of people applying for food stamps is rising at twice the pace of the U.S. as a whole (from Seeing Red AZ) - "One of the reasons so many people are signing up for welfare is due to so many welfare offices being opened up by the state and making it easy:," followed by a listing of all DES offices in the state.
No acknowledgement that maybe the reason that more people are applying for food stamps and other assistance is that more people *need* the assistance.
- Rep. John Kavanagh, speaking gleefully on the effects of cuts to the state's universities - "Since our cuts are going to send ASU back to the Middle Ages, the question is how many monks will they need?"
And that's just skimming the surface.
Then we move on to the transparency of the budget process (and balancing the state's budget in the face of the current fiscal crisis), something that the wingers complained about on an annual basis, when the moderate Republicans in the lege worked out a budget with then-Governor Napolitano and were able to garner enough support for it on both sides of the aisle to pass it. So what do the wingers do now that they've ousted most of the moderates in the Republican caucus and have fellow traveller Jan Brewer in the Governor's office?
Determine which programs to cut, and how savagely, behind closed doors.
They've even made their blog, Capitol Ideas (http://azhousegop.blogspot.com/), available to "invited readers" (i.e. - "true believers" in their view, "fellow Kool-Aid drinkers" in mine) only.
And then there are the bills.
In addition to their now-annual moves to repeal the state's equalization property tax, a dedicated funding source for education (SB1107, among others) or moves to repeal other taxes (HCR2034, et. al.), they've got the bills with the usual nativist pablum (with Russell Pearce lending his name to at least 16 of them), the anti-choice screeds (such as HB2564), and, of course, the gun fetish bills (SB1270, HB2171, and others).
But wait, there's more -
- The myriad bills against the use of photo radar, the most colorful of which may be Rep. Andy Biggs' HB2124, which won't allow photo radar to be used to issue tickets for going less than 35 mph in a school zone or less than 85 mph on a freeway. (Thanks to blogger Mike McClellan at AZCentral.com for the heads-up on HB2124)
You know, I can understand the 85 mph requirement in the rural portions of the state, where the speed limit is 75 mph, but 35 mph in a school zone? If there is one area that calls for strict enforcement of speed limits it's school zones.
- Sen. Ron Gould's SB1359, which would allow cities and towns to "construct, operate and finance the construction of toll roads within the corporate limits of the city or town."
- Sen. John Huppenthal's SB1393, a measure written so broadly that it would turn the public school system into a religious school system.
- Rep. Warde Nichols' scheme to disband the Arizona Board of Regents, HCR2002.
- SB1123, a Republican move to make Tucson's municipal elections non-partisan, mostly because Democrats win in Tucson.
- SB1147, which would bar state agencies from adopting any rules or policies regarding greenhouse gases or fuel economy without the express direction of the lege. The same lege that is run by Republicans who think that scientific evidence regarding global warming and human impact on the environment is a fraud.
There are more, but the point is made - Pearce, Kavanagh, and Harper have a LOT of company this year down on West Washington.
As such, the winner of this year's Legislative Loon Award is...
The entire Republican caucus of the Arizona Legislature.
God help us all.
Note: to be fair, I should note that there are still a few members of the Rep caucus who take the idea of public service seriously, however, most of them have to keep silent or face a primary challenge from hardliners. And in today's AZ Republican Party, the reality is that few of them are safe from such a challenge.
As in previous years, the likes of State Sens. Russell Pearce and Jack Harper were frontrunners for this award, as was Representative John Kavanagh. In addition to their nativist enthusiasms, Pearce and Kavanagh are the chairs of their respective chambers' Appropriations Committees, and have the influence to further the more radical parts of their ideology. Harper is, well, *Harper,* the man who never met a bill or utterance too outlandish or ignorant for him to put his name to it.
In a normal year, there would be no more than one or two others in serious contention (Trish Groe will be missed...OK, not really.)
But this year, a huge percentage of their colleagues have given free rein to their inner whackjob, in ways that go beyond the usual "appeal to the wingers back home" bills that go nowhere, and were never meant to.
Before we even enter into a discussion of some of the horrific bills proposed this session, there's the "colorful" utterances of some of the legislators to consider -
- Rep. Frank Antenori, a resident of Tucson and elected to represent part of Tucson, expressed objections to newspapers designating him as "R-Tucson." Apparently, he has a problem with the "hippies" that run the city.
- Sen. Pam Gorman, from her blog, on the prospect of devastating budget cuts for education and the rest of the state's budget (emphasis mine) - "Essentially, we will get to sit around in small groups brainstorming on ways to cut government spending instead of the normal nauseating disputes about how to spend more. Yippee! Now, where’s my party hat? "
- Sen. Jack Harper, responding to a story that Arizona, the rate of people applying for food stamps is rising at twice the pace of the U.S. as a whole (from Seeing Red AZ) - "One of the reasons so many people are signing up for welfare is due to so many welfare offices being opened up by the state and making it easy:," followed by a listing of all DES offices in the state.
No acknowledgement that maybe the reason that more people are applying for food stamps and other assistance is that more people *need* the assistance.
- Rep. John Kavanagh, speaking gleefully on the effects of cuts to the state's universities - "Since our cuts are going to send ASU back to the Middle Ages, the question is how many monks will they need?"
And that's just skimming the surface.
Then we move on to the transparency of the budget process (and balancing the state's budget in the face of the current fiscal crisis), something that the wingers complained about on an annual basis, when the moderate Republicans in the lege worked out a budget with then-Governor Napolitano and were able to garner enough support for it on both sides of the aisle to pass it. So what do the wingers do now that they've ousted most of the moderates in the Republican caucus and have fellow traveller Jan Brewer in the Governor's office?
Determine which programs to cut, and how savagely, behind closed doors.
They've even made their blog, Capitol Ideas (http://azhousegop.blogspot.com/), available to "invited readers" (i.e. - "true believers" in their view, "fellow Kool-Aid drinkers" in mine) only.
And then there are the bills.
In addition to their now-annual moves to repeal the state's equalization property tax, a dedicated funding source for education (SB1107, among others) or moves to repeal other taxes (HCR2034, et. al.), they've got the bills with the usual nativist pablum (with Russell Pearce lending his name to at least 16 of them), the anti-choice screeds (such as HB2564), and, of course, the gun fetish bills (SB1270, HB2171, and others).
But wait, there's more -
- The myriad bills against the use of photo radar, the most colorful of which may be Rep. Andy Biggs' HB2124, which won't allow photo radar to be used to issue tickets for going less than 35 mph in a school zone or less than 85 mph on a freeway. (Thanks to blogger Mike McClellan at AZCentral.com for the heads-up on HB2124)
You know, I can understand the 85 mph requirement in the rural portions of the state, where the speed limit is 75 mph, but 35 mph in a school zone? If there is one area that calls for strict enforcement of speed limits it's school zones.
- Sen. Ron Gould's SB1359, which would allow cities and towns to "construct, operate and finance the construction of toll roads within the corporate limits of the city or town."
- Sen. John Huppenthal's SB1393, a measure written so broadly that it would turn the public school system into a religious school system.
- Rep. Warde Nichols' scheme to disband the Arizona Board of Regents, HCR2002.
- SB1123, a Republican move to make Tucson's municipal elections non-partisan, mostly because Democrats win in Tucson.
- SB1147, which would bar state agencies from adopting any rules or policies regarding greenhouse gases or fuel economy without the express direction of the lege. The same lege that is run by Republicans who think that scientific evidence regarding global warming and human impact on the environment is a fraud.
There are more, but the point is made - Pearce, Kavanagh, and Harper have a LOT of company this year down on West Washington.
As such, the winner of this year's Legislative Loon Award is...
The entire Republican caucus of the Arizona Legislature.
God help us all.
Note: to be fair, I should note that there are still a few members of the Rep caucus who take the idea of public service seriously, however, most of them have to keep silent or face a primary challenge from hardliners. And in today's AZ Republican Party, the reality is that few of them are safe from such a challenge.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Republicans: Opposed To Big Government Helping People...
...But Not Opposed To Big Goverment Restricting People...
...Thanks go out to That's My Congress! for pointing this one out...
This may be a shock, but it turns out that not all Republicans are supporters of the ideal of smaller government.
Well, under specific circumstances, anyway.
Senator John Cornyn and Congressman Lamar Smith, both representing Texas, have each introduced identical bills to end and criminalize anonymous use of the internet.
Under the guise of fighting child pornography, Cornyn introduced S.436 and Smith introduced H.R.1076, the "Internet Stopping Adults Facilitating the Exploitation of Today's Youth (SAFETY) Act of 2009."
Most of the Act does, in fact, address child porn and exploitation of minors.
However, both bills have the same overreaching section.
And as Declan McCullagh, chief political correspondent for CNET points out -
At a press conference touting the bills, Cornyn said (quoted in the CNET article) -
Umm...yeah.
If all Cornyn and Smith were interested in was restricting child porn, there would be specific safeguards in the bill's language to limit the availability of records retained under section 5 to child porn investigations.
No such provisions exist in the bills.
This is a rather hypocritical "pro-Big Brother/Big Government" turn from two Republicans who joined all but three D.C. Republicans in voting against the economic stimulus that was passed to try to aid the average American during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s.
You know, the economic stimulus package that has provisions to help kids with their educations...oh wait...that's "helping," not "restricting."
I understand now.
Another take on this from CrooksandLiars.com here.
Later...
...Thanks go out to That's My Congress! for pointing this one out...
This may be a shock, but it turns out that not all Republicans are supporters of the ideal of smaller government.
Well, under specific circumstances, anyway.
Senator John Cornyn and Congressman Lamar Smith, both representing Texas, have each introduced identical bills to end and criminalize anonymous use of the internet.
Under the guise of fighting child pornography, Cornyn introduced S.436 and Smith introduced H.R.1076, the "Internet Stopping Adults Facilitating the Exploitation of Today's Youth (SAFETY) Act of 2009."
Most of the Act does, in fact, address child porn and exploitation of minors.
However, both bills have the same overreaching section.
SEC. 5. RETENTION OF RECORDS BY ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION SERVICE PROVIDERS.
Section 2703 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(h) Retention of Certain Records and Information- A provider of an electronic communication service or remote computing service shall retain for a period of at least two years all records or other information pertaining to the identity of a user of a temporarily assigned network address the service assigns to that user.'.
And as Declan McCullagh, chief political correspondent for CNET points out -
The legal definition of electronic communication service is "any service which provides to users thereof the ability to send or receive wire or electronic communications." The U.S. Justice Department's position is that any service "that provides others with means of communicating electronically" qualifies.
That sweeps in not just public Wi-Fi access points, but password-protected ones too, and applies to individuals, small businesses, large corporations, libraries, schools, universities, and even government agencies. Voice over IP services may be covered too.
At a press conference touting the bills, Cornyn said (quoted in the CNET article) -
"While the Internet has generated many positive changes in the way we communicate and do business, its limitless nature offers anonymity that has opened the door to criminals looking to harm innocent children."
Umm...yeah.
If all Cornyn and Smith were interested in was restricting child porn, there would be specific safeguards in the bill's language to limit the availability of records retained under section 5 to child porn investigations.
No such provisions exist in the bills.
This is a rather hypocritical "pro-Big Brother/Big Government" turn from two Republicans who joined all but three D.C. Republicans in voting against the economic stimulus that was passed to try to aid the average American during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s.
You know, the economic stimulus package that has provisions to help kids with their educations...oh wait...that's "helping," not "restricting."
I understand now.
Another take on this from CrooksandLiars.com here.
Later...
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Public Forum On The State Budget At ASU On Monday
From a press release -
...In other LD17/Tempe news, on Tuesday, State Senator Meg Burton Cahill and State Representatives David Schapira and Ed Ableser will appear on Tempe cable channel 11 in this month's edition of Let's Talk Tempe. The program is hosted by Tempe Mayor Hugh Hallman. The program is taped before a live audience at the Pyle Center (SW corner of Southern and Rural in Tempe) from 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. The public is invited to watch and participate in the discussion.THE ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE HOUSE AND SENATE DEMOCRATIC CAUCUSES
Invite you to Public Hearings on the State Budget
Members of both the House and Senate Appropriations Committees will be in attendance to hear citizens’ questions and concerns about the state budget shortfall and proposed solutions:
Arizona State University - Main Campus, Tempe
Monday, February 23rd, 2009, 6:30 to 9:00 p.m. at the Memorial Union (MU) building, Ventana Room, Second Floor, Room 241
Paid ($2/hr) Visitor
Parking available in Parking Structure 1
Located at Apache Blvd. and College Ave.
For additional information contact:
Cynthia Aragon, Community and Constituent Liaison, House of Representatives, 602-926-3591 or caragon[at]azleg.gov
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Wonder if Jan Brewer is a fan of The Rolling Stones...
...because they must have had her and the situation in Arizona in mind when they cut the song "Rock And A Hard Place."
The morphing of the GOP into the "Grand Obstructionist Party" isn't confined to all but three members of the Republican membership in Congress.
Across the country, a number of Republican governors have announced that they are considering not accepting some or all of the federal economic stimulus money.
From AP via MSNBC -
The article goes on to note that some of those governors have the luxury of proving up on their "True Conservative" Republican bonafides (apparently, screwing over your constituents is a Republican "principle"), because while *they* may not accept federal stimulus money, they can count on their states' Democratic legislatures to do so for them.
Jan Brewer, Arizona's newly-minted governor (coming up on her one-month anniversary - whooo hooo...right Jan?) doesn't have that luxury - not only does her own party have a majority in both chambers of the state lege, it's the radical, anti-everything positive wing of her party that's in charge.
Which places Brewer, the person who is supposed to be in charge of Arizona's government, in a tough position.
If, as the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) says, she is the one who decides if federal stimulus money is accepted and how it is spent, then her constituents (you know, the ones who will be voting next year), will expect her to look out for their interests. Sen. Russell Pearce, one of the leaders of the radicals, disagrees, but so far he is being polite about it (read the article linked to "says").
So on one hand, if Brewer plans to run for a full term as governor, refusing stimulus money for especially hard-hit Arizona could alienate economically-ailing voters and cost her a general election win.
On the other hand, accepting the money will almost certainly motivate a primary challenge from Pearce's radical wing of the GOP, and given the wingnuts' defeat of moderate Reps last September, such a challenge could very well generate a high enough turnout of the radicals to unseat Brewer even before the general election.
So she's got problems either way she goes, if she pursues a full term.
If she chooses not to seek a full term, that would free her from factoring electoral considerations into her decisions on stimulus money. However, even if electoral considerations are removed from the decision equation, that would leave the best interests of Arizonans competing with her own partisan ideology.
Arizonans - be afraid, very afraid.
Having never met Governor Brewer or any of her advisers, I don't know if they are smart enough to figure a way out of this for Brewer that leaves her with a political future. The tap dancing should be fun to watch though.
That dance has already started, awkwardly, with her trial balloon of a special election to raise the state's sales tax.
That one seems to have had a unique effect of uniting both caucuses of the lege - the Reps have pledged to only cut programs, not raise revenue, and many Dems (including the non-legislator writing this post :) ) find that raising the most regressive tax in the state (one whose instability as a revenue source is a major factor in the state's budget crisis) is the absolutely worst approach for addressing the state's budget shortfall.
BTW - am I the only one who finds that the Governor's move to put it out to referendum, without even *trying* to get it through the lege, smacks of craven political cowardice? One of the things that a governor has to do is make tough, even unpopular, decisions.
Later!
The morphing of the GOP into the "Grand Obstructionist Party" isn't confined to all but three members of the Republican membership in Congress.
Across the country, a number of Republican governors have announced that they are considering not accepting some or all of the federal economic stimulus money.
From AP via MSNBC -
GOP govs consider rejecting stimulus money
Opponents say move puts conservative ideology ahead of constituents
BATON ROUGE, La. - A handful of Republican governors are considering turning down some money from the federal stimulus package, a move opponents say puts conservative ideology ahead of the needs of constituents struggling with record foreclosures and soaring unemployment.
Though none has outright rejected the money available for education, health care and infrastructure, the governors of Texas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alaska, South Carolina and Idaho have all questioned whether the $787 billion bill signed into law this week will even help the economy.
The article goes on to note that some of those governors have the luxury of proving up on their "True Conservative" Republican bonafides (apparently, screwing over your constituents is a Republican "principle"), because while *they* may not accept federal stimulus money, they can count on their states' Democratic legislatures to do so for them.
Jan Brewer, Arizona's newly-minted governor (coming up on her one-month anniversary - whooo hooo...right Jan?) doesn't have that luxury - not only does her own party have a majority in both chambers of the state lege, it's the radical, anti-everything positive wing of her party that's in charge.
Which places Brewer, the person who is supposed to be in charge of Arizona's government, in a tough position.
If, as the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) says, she is the one who decides if federal stimulus money is accepted and how it is spent, then her constituents (you know, the ones who will be voting next year), will expect her to look out for their interests. Sen. Russell Pearce, one of the leaders of the radicals, disagrees, but so far he is being polite about it (read the article linked to "says").
So on one hand, if Brewer plans to run for a full term as governor, refusing stimulus money for especially hard-hit Arizona could alienate economically-ailing voters and cost her a general election win.
On the other hand, accepting the money will almost certainly motivate a primary challenge from Pearce's radical wing of the GOP, and given the wingnuts' defeat of moderate Reps last September, such a challenge could very well generate a high enough turnout of the radicals to unseat Brewer even before the general election.
So she's got problems either way she goes, if she pursues a full term.
If she chooses not to seek a full term, that would free her from factoring electoral considerations into her decisions on stimulus money. However, even if electoral considerations are removed from the decision equation, that would leave the best interests of Arizonans competing with her own partisan ideology.
Arizonans - be afraid, very afraid.
Having never met Governor Brewer or any of her advisers, I don't know if they are smart enough to figure a way out of this for Brewer that leaves her with a political future. The tap dancing should be fun to watch though.
That dance has already started, awkwardly, with her trial balloon of a special election to raise the state's sales tax.
That one seems to have had a unique effect of uniting both caucuses of the lege - the Reps have pledged to only cut programs, not raise revenue, and many Dems (including the non-legislator writing this post :) ) find that raising the most regressive tax in the state (one whose instability as a revenue source is a major factor in the state's budget crisis) is the absolutely worst approach for addressing the state's budget shortfall.
BTW - am I the only one who finds that the Governor's move to put it out to referendum, without even *trying* to get it through the lege, smacks of craven political cowardice? One of the things that a governor has to do is make tough, even unpopular, decisions.
Later!
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
"Bush league" behavior isn't confined to the minor leagues
...and this post is *not* about George W. Bush...
Perhaps inspired by the commencement of baseball's spring training season (reporting dates here), I've been struck (not for the first time, nor am I the first to make this observation), that politics is has a structure that is very similar to professional baseball.
School committee and city council seats and the like are analogous to A-level minor ball. For many, if not most, of the holders of these offices, these are entry level positions where they spend most of their time learning their professions.
Mayors and state legislators are politics' AA leagues. There are some entry-level participants, and a few are ready to make the jump to the bigs, but most have some experience but still need to hone their craft. Lower level statewide offices tend to fall into this category, too.
Higher-level statewide offices and most seats in the U.S. Congress are the equivalent of AAA. Most of the participants have major-league ready skills, but are in search of an opportunity to move up.
At the major league level are a few Congressfolks (Speakers, Majority and Minority Leaders and Whips, etc.), most U.S. Senators, and, of course, the President of the United States.
The categories are a little flexible, as politics is more about influence wielded than about the office occupied. For example, for the longest time, the most powerful elected official in Massachusetts wasn't the governor or one of the U.S. senators. Instead, the mayor of Boston was often held that distinction. Must have been something about controlling when the State House was plowed out during the winter. :)
Arizonans, Democrats and Republicans alike, should be grateful that Phil Gordon doesn't have the big stick of snow removal available to him. :))
All of which serves as a set up to this - while most political offices and office-holders are "minor league", with the colorful imagery that name can bring to mind, few are "bush league."
"Bush League", courtesy Princeton University - "a league of teams that do not belong to a major league (especially baseball)"
One of the common characteristics in both baseball and politics is that while players are learning the basic skills of their respective professions as they rise through the levels, they also learn the 'soft' skills, the behaviors that lead to long-term success at the next level.
Behaviors that have less to do with knowing how to hit curve balls or how to initiate a quorum call to block a bill, and more with acting like a professional.
The movie Bull Durham has a couple of good scenes about shower shoes and interview cliches that illustrates this phenomenon.
It looks like many Republicans, even putative "major leaguers," have forgotten that as much as anything else, professionalism influences how long someone stays in the big leagues.
Sometimes it's something as trivial as threatening to kill a fellow legislator's bills in a given session of the AZ lege because that legislator (a Dem, of course) dared to publicly and on the record, debunk the Reps' talking points about the state's budget crisis. (Hey guys - it's not Janet Napolitano's fault, no matter how much you want people to ignore the lege's creation of every budget) Still, the AZ lege is definitely a minor league, and that sort of behavior isn't exactly unheard of in the minors.
Some Republicans however, don't have that mitigating circumstance to fall back on.
This week, House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) put together a web ad crowing about the solidarity of the House GOP in it's opposition to the economic stimulus package that President Obama signed into law today in Denver.
It was set to the song "Back in the Saddle" by Aerosmith.
For those of you who are unfamiliar with the lyrics of the song, it's about a guy...ummm... "expressing his happiness" at getting back together with a favorite hooker and some of their ensuing activities.
Which, coincidentally, are the same things that the Reps in Congress have been doing to America for years.
It's pretty bush league to crow about screwing your employer.
The video had been posted on YouTube, but was later pulled down due to a copyright complaint from the band's management.
Copyright infringement for political gain is pretty bush league, too.
HuffingtonPost coverage here.
Cantor hasn't been having a good month - just last week, his office sent out an obscenity-laden anti-union (AFSCME to be specific) video (SF Chronicle). He defended it by saying it was a satire, but later apologized for it.
It's pretty bush league to attack your employers (yes, union workers are citizens, taxpayers, and voters) as profane thugs.
I'll be nice and ignore the fact that the employer of the wife of the stridently anti-bailout Cantor received millions of dollars from the bank bailout. (HuffingtonPost)
Piling on would be so bush league. :))
Of course, some of the bush league stuff is closer to home.
Both of Arizona's U.S. Senators, John McCain and Jon Kyl, are ignoring the President's visit to one of the state's areas that is most impacted by the collapse of the housing bubble.
They have "other plans."
Ignoring the needs of your constituents because the President isn't a member of your party is pretty bush league...oh wait. They were doing that even when fellow Rep George W. Bush was in the White House.
Never mind. :)
Anyway, not quite falling into the "bush league" category was former Congressman (and eternal blowhard) JD Hayworth's appearance on MSNBC yesterday on the show "Hardball with Chris Matthews."
It was more in the category of "faded player hanging around the independent leagues [i.e. - talk radio] pathetically trying for one more shot at glory."
He insisted that Republican policies of endless deregulation and tax cuts for the wealthy weren't the problem with the economy, it was Sen. Charles Schumer and George Soros.
I'm not making this up. Watch the video.
Anyway, it's hardly unheard of for players who don't want to fade quietly into retirement to sign on with an independent league to showcase/maintain their skills while seeking another chance at a season in the sun.
Rickey Henderson, one of the all-time great, perhaps the single greatest, leadoff hitters ever played in a number of indy leagues while waiting for one last call from a major league club. That call didn't come, but he was a first ballot electee to the Baseball Hall of Fame this year.
On the other hand, JD was and is no Rickey. About the only thing they have in common is their ability to talk a good game.
However, unlike JD, Henderson could actually *play*.
Of course, Hayworth's appearance may not have been a case of a "pathetic attempt to regain former glory".
It could have been a case of "the Republicans are scraping the bottom of the barrel of people who can spew their anti-average American BS with a straight face."
The take of Tedski at R-Cubed on this, with embedded video, here.
Later!
Perhaps inspired by the commencement of baseball's spring training season (reporting dates here), I've been struck (not for the first time, nor am I the first to make this observation), that politics is has a structure that is very similar to professional baseball.
School committee and city council seats and the like are analogous to A-level minor ball. For many, if not most, of the holders of these offices, these are entry level positions where they spend most of their time learning their professions.
Mayors and state legislators are politics' AA leagues. There are some entry-level participants, and a few are ready to make the jump to the bigs, but most have some experience but still need to hone their craft. Lower level statewide offices tend to fall into this category, too.
Higher-level statewide offices and most seats in the U.S. Congress are the equivalent of AAA. Most of the participants have major-league ready skills, but are in search of an opportunity to move up.
At the major league level are a few Congressfolks (Speakers, Majority and Minority Leaders and Whips, etc.), most U.S. Senators, and, of course, the President of the United States.
The categories are a little flexible, as politics is more about influence wielded than about the office occupied. For example, for the longest time, the most powerful elected official in Massachusetts wasn't the governor or one of the U.S. senators. Instead, the mayor of Boston was often held that distinction. Must have been something about controlling when the State House was plowed out during the winter. :)
Arizonans, Democrats and Republicans alike, should be grateful that Phil Gordon doesn't have the big stick of snow removal available to him. :))
All of which serves as a set up to this - while most political offices and office-holders are "minor league", with the colorful imagery that name can bring to mind, few are "bush league."
"Bush League", courtesy Princeton University - "a league of teams that do not belong to a major league (especially baseball)"
One of the common characteristics in both baseball and politics is that while players are learning the basic skills of their respective professions as they rise through the levels, they also learn the 'soft' skills, the behaviors that lead to long-term success at the next level.
Behaviors that have less to do with knowing how to hit curve balls or how to initiate a quorum call to block a bill, and more with acting like a professional.
The movie Bull Durham has a couple of good scenes about shower shoes and interview cliches that illustrates this phenomenon.
It looks like many Republicans, even putative "major leaguers," have forgotten that as much as anything else, professionalism influences how long someone stays in the big leagues.
Sometimes it's something as trivial as threatening to kill a fellow legislator's bills in a given session of the AZ lege because that legislator (a Dem, of course) dared to publicly and on the record, debunk the Reps' talking points about the state's budget crisis. (Hey guys - it's not Janet Napolitano's fault, no matter how much you want people to ignore the lege's creation of every budget) Still, the AZ lege is definitely a minor league, and that sort of behavior isn't exactly unheard of in the minors.
Some Republicans however, don't have that mitigating circumstance to fall back on.
This week, House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) put together a web ad crowing about the solidarity of the House GOP in it's opposition to the economic stimulus package that President Obama signed into law today in Denver.
It was set to the song "Back in the Saddle" by Aerosmith.
For those of you who are unfamiliar with the lyrics of the song, it's about a guy...ummm... "expressing his happiness" at getting back together with a favorite hooker and some of their ensuing activities.
Which, coincidentally, are the same things that the Reps in Congress have been doing to America for years.
It's pretty bush league to crow about screwing your employer.
The video had been posted on YouTube, but was later pulled down due to a copyright complaint from the band's management.
Copyright infringement for political gain is pretty bush league, too.
HuffingtonPost coverage here.
Cantor hasn't been having a good month - just last week, his office sent out an obscenity-laden anti-union (AFSCME to be specific) video (SF Chronicle). He defended it by saying it was a satire, but later apologized for it.
It's pretty bush league to attack your employers (yes, union workers are citizens, taxpayers, and voters) as profane thugs.
I'll be nice and ignore the fact that the employer of the wife of the stridently anti-bailout Cantor received millions of dollars from the bank bailout. (HuffingtonPost)
Piling on would be so bush league. :))
Of course, some of the bush league stuff is closer to home.
Both of Arizona's U.S. Senators, John McCain and Jon Kyl, are ignoring the President's visit to one of the state's areas that is most impacted by the collapse of the housing bubble.
They have "other plans."
Ignoring the needs of your constituents because the President isn't a member of your party is pretty bush league...oh wait. They were doing that even when fellow Rep George W. Bush was in the White House.
Never mind. :)
Anyway, not quite falling into the "bush league" category was former Congressman (and eternal blowhard) JD Hayworth's appearance on MSNBC yesterday on the show "Hardball with Chris Matthews."
It was more in the category of "faded player hanging around the independent leagues [i.e. - talk radio] pathetically trying for one more shot at glory."
He insisted that Republican policies of endless deregulation and tax cuts for the wealthy weren't the problem with the economy, it was Sen. Charles Schumer and George Soros.
I'm not making this up. Watch the video.
Anyway, it's hardly unheard of for players who don't want to fade quietly into retirement to sign on with an independent league to showcase/maintain their skills while seeking another chance at a season in the sun.
Rickey Henderson, one of the all-time great, perhaps the single greatest, leadoff hitters ever played in a number of indy leagues while waiting for one last call from a major league club. That call didn't come, but he was a first ballot electee to the Baseball Hall of Fame this year.
On the other hand, JD was and is no Rickey. About the only thing they have in common is their ability to talk a good game.
However, unlike JD, Henderson could actually *play*.
Of course, Hayworth's appearance may not have been a case of a "pathetic attempt to regain former glory".
It could have been a case of "the Republicans are scraping the bottom of the barrel of people who can spew their anti-average American BS with a straight face."
The take of Tedski at R-Cubed on this, with embedded video, here.
Later!
Monday, February 16, 2009
Events calendar...
Haven't done one of these in a while, but it's been a while since we had a week this event-full :)) ...
Tuesday, February 17 - The Arizona Latino Legislative Caucus is holding a press conference to call on the U.S. Department of Justice and ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) to investigate Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio for racial profiling and other civil rights-related violations.
Time: 12 p.m.
Location: House Lawn, 1700 W. Washington St., Phoenix, AZ
Tuesday, February 17 - U.S. Reps Gabrielle Giffords (D-CD8) and Harry Mitchell (D-CD5) will be holding a forum on economic recovery, focusing on "science, technology and renewable energy."
Time: 12 noon - 1:30 p.m.
Location: Pima Room, Memorial Union, Tempe campus of Arizona State University
Wednesday, February 18 - President Barack Obama will speak at Mesa's Dobson High School on his plan to address the epidemic of mortgage foreclosures.
Time: 10:15 a.m. - 11:00 a.m.
Location: Dobson High School, 1501 W. Guadalupe Road, Mesa
Tuesday, February 17 - The Arizona Latino Legislative Caucus is holding a press conference to call on the U.S. Department of Justice and ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) to investigate Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio for racial profiling and other civil rights-related violations.
Time: 12 p.m.
Location: House Lawn, 1700 W. Washington St., Phoenix, AZ
Tuesday, February 17 - U.S. Reps Gabrielle Giffords (D-CD8) and Harry Mitchell (D-CD5) will be holding a forum on economic recovery, focusing on "science, technology and renewable energy."
Time: 12 noon - 1:30 p.m.
Location: Pima Room, Memorial Union, Tempe campus of Arizona State University
Wednesday, February 18 - President Barack Obama will speak at Mesa's Dobson High School on his plan to address the epidemic of mortgage foreclosures.
Time: 10:15 a.m. - 11:00 a.m.
Location: Dobson High School, 1501 W. Guadalupe Road, Mesa
Presidential survey is out
C-SPAN has released the results of its latest survey of historians, ranking the "42 former occupants of the White House on ten attributes of leadership."
As with C-SPAN's last survey (in 2000), Abraham Lincoln topped the list. In fact there wasn't much movement in the rankings, with a couple of notable exceptions -
Ulysses S. Grant moved up from 33rd to 23rd overall...
Rutherford B. Hayes moved down from 26th to 33rd overall...
And Bill Clinton moved up from 21st to 15th, making him the highest ranked living ex-president. (Gee, ya think that the job his successor did made him look better by comparison???)
As for the most recent ex-occupant of the Oval Office, George W. Bush?
36th.
Worse than Democrats Jimmy Carter (25th), Bill Clinton (15th), Lyndon Johnson (11th), and John F. Kennedy (6th).
The only presidents who were ranked lower than baby Bush were William Henry Harrison (who died one month into office), Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce, and James Buchanan (all of whom presided over the run-up to the Civil War. The best thing that can be said about their presidencies is that without them, Abe Lincoln wouldn't have had the opportunity to become the greatest president), Warren Harding (of Teapot Dome fame) and Andrew Johnson (who, ya know, was the first impeached president).
It'll be fun to watch the Rep blogosphere spin this one...
As with C-SPAN's last survey (in 2000), Abraham Lincoln topped the list. In fact there wasn't much movement in the rankings, with a couple of notable exceptions -
Ulysses S. Grant moved up from 33rd to 23rd overall...
Rutherford B. Hayes moved down from 26th to 33rd overall...
And Bill Clinton moved up from 21st to 15th, making him the highest ranked living ex-president. (Gee, ya think that the job his successor did made him look better by comparison???)
As for the most recent ex-occupant of the Oval Office, George W. Bush?
36th.
Worse than Democrats Jimmy Carter (25th), Bill Clinton (15th), Lyndon Johnson (11th), and John F. Kennedy (6th).
The only presidents who were ranked lower than baby Bush were William Henry Harrison (who died one month into office), Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce, and James Buchanan (all of whom presided over the run-up to the Civil War. The best thing that can be said about their presidencies is that without them, Abe Lincoln wouldn't have had the opportunity to become the greatest president), Warren Harding (of Teapot Dome fame) and Andrew Johnson (who, ya know, was the first impeached president).
It'll be fun to watch the Rep blogosphere spin this one...
Just a suggestion...
...Wouldn't it be sweet if, when President Obama gives his talk about the mortgage foreclosure crisis on Wednesday, he looks around the gathering at Dobson High, and mentions how useful at tool education will be to help ensure that the American economy regains and retains its strength?
Maybe if DHS's principal or one of the people from the school district (superintendent or school board members) talks for a moment to a White House staffer, they might want to mention some of the things that AZ's legislative Republicans are hacking out of education (you know, things like teachers, books, and schools).
Just a suggestion...
Maybe if DHS's principal or one of the people from the school district (superintendent or school board members) talks for a moment to a White House staffer, they might want to mention some of the things that AZ's legislative Republicans are hacking out of education (you know, things like teachers, books, and schools).
Just a suggestion...
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Arizona Democratic Party Chair Election
On Saturday, March 7, the AZ Dems' State Committee will meet (again! :) ) at the Wyndham Hotel in Phoenix to elect a new chair of the state party.
Registration starts at 8:00 a.m.; registration closes and the meeting starts at 10:00 a.m. (Meeting notice here)
Thus far, the only official candidate is former chair Don Bivens; Tedski at Rum, Romanism, Rebellion has Bivens' letter to state committee members here. At the end of the letter is a list of Democratic activists who support Bivens' candidacy.
However, there is a Draft Bob Lord movement afoot. Lord was the Dem candidate in CD3 who pushed incumbent Republican John Shadegg (R-Big Healthcare) into the fight of his political career. DBL has a website here. It's unclear if Lord himself is going to run, but if he does, it could be interesting. A number of Bivens' supporters lent their names to his efforts during a period when it seemed that Lord wasn't going to run. However, he has been positioning himself to make himself eligible to run (according to a comment from Zelph on this R-Cubed post, Lord is now a PC in LD11) so it could be an interesting meeting.
Or it could be a 20-minute rubberstamp/acclamation special, and all of the folks from the state's hinterlands who trek to downtown Phoenix for the 2nd time in six weeks will have a legitimate gripe about wasting another whole day for less than 1/2 of an hour's B.S.
Guess we'll have to wait and see...
Registration starts at 8:00 a.m.; registration closes and the meeting starts at 10:00 a.m. (Meeting notice here)
Thus far, the only official candidate is former chair Don Bivens; Tedski at Rum, Romanism, Rebellion has Bivens' letter to state committee members here. At the end of the letter is a list of Democratic activists who support Bivens' candidacy.
However, there is a Draft Bob Lord movement afoot. Lord was the Dem candidate in CD3 who pushed incumbent Republican John Shadegg (R-Big Healthcare) into the fight of his political career. DBL has a website here. It's unclear if Lord himself is going to run, but if he does, it could be interesting. A number of Bivens' supporters lent their names to his efforts during a period when it seemed that Lord wasn't going to run. However, he has been positioning himself to make himself eligible to run (according to a comment from Zelph on this R-Cubed post, Lord is now a PC in LD11) so it could be an interesting meeting.
Or it could be a 20-minute rubberstamp/acclamation special, and all of the folks from the state's hinterlands who trek to downtown Phoenix for the 2nd time in six weeks will have a legitimate gripe about wasting another whole day for less than 1/2 of an hour's B.S.
Guess we'll have to wait and see...
Obama to visit Dobson High School on Wednesday
Here are the details, courtesy the East Valley Tribune -
On Wednesday, doors will open for those with tickets at approximately 8:30 a.m.; President Obama is expected to speak from 10:15 a.m. until 11:00 a.m.
More details as they are worked out and publicized...
President Barack Obama is coming to Mesa’s Dobson High School on Wednesday morning. An “extremely limited” number of tickets will be distributed on a first-come, first-serve basis at 10 a.m. Monday at the main entrance of Dobson High, 1501 W. Guadalupe Road.
There will be a one-ticket limit per person.
On Wednesday, doors will open for those with tickets at approximately 8:30 a.m.; President Obama is expected to speak from 10:15 a.m. until 11:00 a.m.
More details as they are worked out and publicized...
Arizona's Congressional delegation and the stimulus bill...
On Friday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a compromise version of H.R. 1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The final vote was 246-183, with one answering 'present.' All House Republicans voted against the bill, and all but seven Democrats voted for the bill. All of AZ's Democratic representatives voted for it.
Later on Friday over in the Senate, the same compromise version was passed by a 60 - 38 vote. All Democrats present voted for the bill (Ted Kennedy was out, and Al Franken hasn't been seated yet), as well as Republicans Olympia Snow, Susan Collins (both from Maine) and Arlen Specter (PA). Both of AZ's Republican senators, Jon Kyl and John McCain, voted against the economic stimulus package.
AZ's delegation on the stimulus bill, in their own words (from news coverage, press releases, and the Congressional Record) -
Rep. Harry Mitchell (D-CD5), from a press release, courtesy Arizona Congress Watch - “Arizona’s job losses last year were worse than every other state but one. People are facing foreclosure and struggling to make ends meet,” said Mitchell. “The risk of inaction is too great. This bill will create and maintain jobs and we must take this step to get people back to work and get the economy back on track.”
Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-CD7), from a press release - “I voted to support today’s Recovery Act, a bill that is far from perfect, but opens up possibilities for many...The State of Arizona is in a budget crisis that it is translating to cuts in the Department of Economic Security, slashed departments at our public universities and colleges, money taken from our children in elementary, junior high, and high schools, and increases in hunger, poverty, and the ranks of the uninsured. The Recovery Act will help stop this kind of hemorrhaging, which is why I support it."
Rep. John Shadegg (R-CD3), from a press release -
"But one of the bill’s worst provisions has gone almost unnoticed, dangerously lurking below the radar of those exposing the bill’s flaws.
“Comparative Effectiveness Research,” sounds innocuous, but big-government programs always do. The $1.1 billion of the stimulus package earmarked for this project is a significant step toward government-run healthcare
Shadegg from a post in The Hill's CongressBlog, titled "Friday The 13th Horror" - "But of course the greatest horror is not the process – it is the product. At the end of the day we have an economic stimulus without economic stimulus."
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-CD8), as quoted in the Arizona Daily Star - 'The legislation will create or save 3.5 million jobs nationally over the next two years. Approximately 70,000 of those jobs will be in Arizona," she said in a press statement.'
The same article goes on to list a series of informational forums that Giffords will be part of, including one on Tuesday at ASU from noon - 1:30 p.m with CD5's Representative Harry Mitchell. (Pima Room in the Memorial Union)
More info on the forums, courtesy Congresswoman Giffords' website here.
Rep. Jeff Flake (R-CD6), from the Congressional Record - "We know enough about this legislation to know that it is bad legislation. First and foremost, the process is bad, but it’s bad legislation...I doubt that John Maynard Keynes would believe that $50 million for the
National Endowment for the Arts would be stimulative. All that it stimulates is more spending later."
Sen. Jon Kyl (R), from the Congressional Record - ...His speech is too long to find one good quote, so I recommend reading it in its entirety at the link. He opposed the bill for a litany of reasons, including ACORN, Filipino veterans, a maglev rail line from L.A. to Las Vegas, money for small shipyards (and not enough $ for big shipyards), and the Davis-Bacon Act (prevailing wage).
Sen. John McCain (R), was quoted as calling the bill "generational theft" on CNN and elsewhere. (NY Times)
President Obama is expected to sign the bill on Tuesday in Denver, and will be in Phoenix on Wednesday to announce a plan to fight home foreclosures. Details as they become available.
Note: In the future, I expect to leave this sort of post to Stacy at AZ Congress Watch - it took longer just to set up the links than to write the rest of the post.
Later on Friday over in the Senate, the same compromise version was passed by a 60 - 38 vote. All Democrats present voted for the bill (Ted Kennedy was out, and Al Franken hasn't been seated yet), as well as Republicans Olympia Snow, Susan Collins (both from Maine) and Arlen Specter (PA). Both of AZ's Republican senators, Jon Kyl and John McCain, voted against the economic stimulus package.
AZ's delegation on the stimulus bill, in their own words (from news coverage, press releases, and the Congressional Record) -
Rep. Harry Mitchell (D-CD5), from a press release, courtesy Arizona Congress Watch - “Arizona’s job losses last year were worse than every other state but one. People are facing foreclosure and struggling to make ends meet,” said Mitchell. “The risk of inaction is too great. This bill will create and maintain jobs and we must take this step to get people back to work and get the economy back on track.”
Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-CD7), from a press release - “I voted to support today’s Recovery Act, a bill that is far from perfect, but opens up possibilities for many...The State of Arizona is in a budget crisis that it is translating to cuts in the Department of Economic Security, slashed departments at our public universities and colleges, money taken from our children in elementary, junior high, and high schools, and increases in hunger, poverty, and the ranks of the uninsured. The Recovery Act will help stop this kind of hemorrhaging, which is why I support it."
Rep. John Shadegg (R-CD3), from a press release -
"But one of the bill’s worst provisions has gone almost unnoticed, dangerously lurking below the radar of those exposing the bill’s flaws.
“Comparative Effectiveness Research,” sounds innocuous, but big-government programs always do. The $1.1 billion of the stimulus package earmarked for this project is a significant step toward government-run healthcare
Shadegg from a post in The Hill's CongressBlog, titled "Friday The 13th Horror" - "But of course the greatest horror is not the process – it is the product. At the end of the day we have an economic stimulus without economic stimulus."
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-CD8), as quoted in the Arizona Daily Star - 'The legislation will create or save 3.5 million jobs nationally over the next two years. Approximately 70,000 of those jobs will be in Arizona," she said in a press statement.'
The same article goes on to list a series of informational forums that Giffords will be part of, including one on Tuesday at ASU from noon - 1:30 p.m with CD5's Representative Harry Mitchell. (Pima Room in the Memorial Union)
More info on the forums, courtesy Congresswoman Giffords' website here.
Rep. Jeff Flake (R-CD6), from the Congressional Record - "We know enough about this legislation to know that it is bad legislation. First and foremost, the process is bad, but it’s bad legislation...I doubt that John Maynard Keynes would believe that $50 million for the
National Endowment for the Arts would be stimulative. All that it stimulates is more spending later."
Sen. Jon Kyl (R), from the Congressional Record - ...His speech is too long to find one good quote, so I recommend reading it in its entirety at the link. He opposed the bill for a litany of reasons, including ACORN, Filipino veterans, a maglev rail line from L.A. to Las Vegas, money for small shipyards (and not enough $ for big shipyards), and the Davis-Bacon Act (prevailing wage).
Sen. John McCain (R), was quoted as calling the bill "generational theft" on CNN and elsewhere. (NY Times)
President Obama is expected to sign the bill on Tuesday in Denver, and will be in Phoenix on Wednesday to announce a plan to fight home foreclosures. Details as they become available.
Note: In the future, I expect to leave this sort of post to Stacy at AZ Congress Watch - it took longer just to set up the links than to write the rest of the post.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
The more things change, the more they stay the same...
A 'quick hit' post on goings-on in Scottsdale...
For those of you who thought that the ouster of Mary Manross as mayor in favor of Jim Lane would change the way that the City deals with developers (aka - rubber stamp everything), read on...
From the AZ Republic (emphasis mine) -
Current Scottsdale ordinance requires that any parcel seeking zoning as a planned regional center (PRC) be at least 25 acres in size. The lot going before the Planning Commission is only 20 acres.
20 acres is smaller than 25, so 'no go', right?
Not so fast.
Connie Padian, a City Zoning Administrator, has issued a "Zoning Interpretation Record."
It says that since the parcel in question abuts another parcel owned by the same developer in Paradise Valley, and that the combined size totals approximately 120 acres...well, you can see where this is going.
From Sonnie Kirtley, chair of the Coalition of Greater Scottsdale (COGS), via email -
Apparently, the wave of change that swept over the country last November missed our quaintly pretentious over-botoxed little desert hamlet, because nothing has changed -
The City genuflected before deep-pocketed developers last year, and they are genuflecting before deep-pocketed developers this year.
About the only this that has changed is Jim Lane's brilliant proclamation to promote tourism in Scottsdale - "Western on Wednesday." He has asked Scottsdale residents to wear "boots, jeans, and other Western attire on Wednesdays" to celebrate the Parada del Sol this month.
I suppose it's better than Pink Taco debacles, but it doesn't really seem like the kind of proactive leadership the city needs to navigate its way through these tough economic times.
Later...
For those of you who thought that the ouster of Mary Manross as mayor in favor of Jim Lane would change the way that the City deals with developers (aka - rubber stamp everything), read on...
From the AZ Republic (emphasis mine) -
Scottsdale Planning Commission will meet March 11 to discuss the proposed Palmeraie project that could bring five-story buildings to the southwestern corner of Indian Bend and Scottsdale roads.
Some area residents are worried about incompatible density and preserving views of Camelback Mountain, and they raised their concerns at a Coalition of Greater Scottsdale meeting late this week at which representatives of Five Star Development met with community activists.
{snip}
The rezoning request in Scottsdale has hit technical hurdles that still must be addressed, however.
Current Scottsdale ordinance requires that any parcel seeking zoning as a planned regional center (PRC) be at least 25 acres in size. The lot going before the Planning Commission is only 20 acres.
20 acres is smaller than 25, so 'no go', right?
Not so fast.
Connie Padian, a City Zoning Administrator, has issued a "Zoning Interpretation Record."
It says that since the parcel in question abuts another parcel owned by the same developer in Paradise Valley, and that the combined size totals approximately 120 acres...well, you can see where this is going.
From Sonnie Kirtley, chair of the Coalition of Greater Scottsdale (COGS), via email -
...You need to get your appeals and comments in the city file prior to that date. So far, there are NO public comments (or staff communications) in that file. Case numbers are 17-AB-2008, 13 ZN 2008 and 13 TA 2008. If the staff "interpretation" is legal, then the developer won't be asking for the 13-TA-2008 text amendment to change ALL properties in the city with 20 acres to be permitted the PRC upzoning. They will just ask that their current Resort Zoning (35 ft max height) be improved to the PRC on their parcel.
Apparently, the wave of change that swept over the country last November missed our quaintly pretentious over-botoxed little desert hamlet, because nothing has changed -
The City genuflected before deep-pocketed developers last year, and they are genuflecting before deep-pocketed developers this year.
About the only this that has changed is Jim Lane's brilliant proclamation to promote tourism in Scottsdale - "Western on Wednesday." He has asked Scottsdale residents to wear "boots, jeans, and other Western attire on Wednesdays" to celebrate the Parada del Sol this month.
I suppose it's better than Pink Taco debacles, but it doesn't really seem like the kind of proactive leadership the city needs to navigate its way through these tough economic times.
Later...
Look!! Up in the air! It's a bird! It's a plane! It's...it's..it's...a Trial Balloon???
Trial Balloon (from Merriam-Webster.com) - "a project or scheme tentatively announced in order to test public opinion"
From the AZ Republic (emphasis mine) -
Translation: "Let's throw this out there and see how loud the screaming is going to be."
You know that the Arizona chapter of the Flat Earth Society (aka - Republicans in the lege) will scream at the thought of doing anything to alleviate the budget crisis, and normal citizens will scream at the thought of weakening or even repealing the Voter Protection Act.
Assuming (for the sake of having something interesting to write about) that the Governor actually brings forth such a proposal (more likely than not, though far from a certainty) and that the lege cooperates in putting the proposal on the ballot (less than likely, though not totally out of the question), here's what I expect to be in any proposal, and expect *won't* be in any proposal...
In: A temporary personal income tax hike
Out: Even a hint of a corporate income tax hike
In: A specific sunset date for any tax increase
Out: A specific sunset date for any weakening of the Voter Protection Act
In: A requirement of a simple majority vote in the lege to go after voter protected funds
Out (and should be in): A requirement of a 3/4 majority vote, both to go after voter-protected funds and to decrease or repeal any tax. It takes a 3/4 vote to raise taxes; it should take a similar vote to go in the opposite direction.
We can't make the Republicans become fiscally responsible, but we can minimize the impact of their fiscal foolishness on the state.
This may also be a signal that Brewer really is interested in running for a full term - if she didn't need to appeal to the moderates and independents she'll need to win a high-profile statewide election, she would just hand the keys to the treasury over to Russell Pearce and John Kavanagh. If she's running however, she is smart enough to know that a Rep isn't going to win a significant statewide election without support from outside of the GOP's Kool-Aid drinking base.
(There have been rumors that she wasn't interested in running, mostly due to health reasons.)
David Safier at Blog for Arizona offers his take on this topic here; State Rep. Daniel Patterson's take here.
Later!
From the AZ Republic (emphasis mine) -
Faced with a sliding economy and deepening state deficit, Gov. Jan Brewer's office is quietly making plans for a spring special election at which voters would be asked to raise taxes and loosen spending mandates on certain state programs, The Arizona Republic has learned.
The proposal remains in its infancy, and details are few. But the Governor's Office is contemplating a temporary increase in taxes that would generate $1 billion annually for the state for a period of two or three years, two sources with knowledge of the discussions told The Republic under condition of anonymity. Additionally, voters would be asked to ease protections that currently block lawmakers from redirecting or cutting funds for voter-approved programs, such as a 2006 initiative that increased tobacco taxes to fund early-childhood education.
{snip}
Brewer spokesman Paul Senseman maintained that "all options are on the table" and said that the governor hasn't signed off on any proposals for a special election.
Translation: "Let's throw this out there and see how loud the screaming is going to be."
You know that the Arizona chapter of the Flat Earth Society (aka - Republicans in the lege) will scream at the thought of doing anything to alleviate the budget crisis, and normal citizens will scream at the thought of weakening or even repealing the Voter Protection Act.
Assuming (for the sake of having something interesting to write about) that the Governor actually brings forth such a proposal (more likely than not, though far from a certainty) and that the lege cooperates in putting the proposal on the ballot (less than likely, though not totally out of the question), here's what I expect to be in any proposal, and expect *won't* be in any proposal...
In: A temporary personal income tax hike
Out: Even a hint of a corporate income tax hike
In: A specific sunset date for any tax increase
Out: A specific sunset date for any weakening of the Voter Protection Act
In: A requirement of a simple majority vote in the lege to go after voter protected funds
Out (and should be in): A requirement of a 3/4 majority vote, both to go after voter-protected funds and to decrease or repeal any tax. It takes a 3/4 vote to raise taxes; it should take a similar vote to go in the opposite direction.
We can't make the Republicans become fiscally responsible, but we can minimize the impact of their fiscal foolishness on the state.
This may also be a signal that Brewer really is interested in running for a full term - if she didn't need to appeal to the moderates and independents she'll need to win a high-profile statewide election, she would just hand the keys to the treasury over to Russell Pearce and John Kavanagh. If she's running however, she is smart enough to know that a Rep isn't going to win a significant statewide election without support from outside of the GOP's Kool-Aid drinking base.
(There have been rumors that she wasn't interested in running, mostly due to health reasons.)
David Safier at Blog for Arizona offers his take on this topic here; State Rep. Daniel Patterson's take here.
Later!
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Housekeeping
Regular readers may notice a change to the list of links along the right hand side.
I've deleted the permanent link to the Arizona Guardian.
While it is still an informative and well-written site, it has now gone to a subscription fee model (upwards of $150/month). As such, I cannot link to it nor, in good conscience, can I point people toward the site.
I wish the writers and organizers of the Guardian well with their venture - the AZ Capitol Times needs the competition. However, making a living off of fee-based internet reporting in the age of blogs and in a cratering economy is a steep mountain to climb.
I've deleted the permanent link to the Arizona Guardian.
While it is still an informative and well-written site, it has now gone to a subscription fee model (upwards of $150/month). As such, I cannot link to it nor, in good conscience, can I point people toward the site.
I wish the writers and organizers of the Guardian well with their venture - the AZ Capitol Times needs the competition. However, making a living off of fee-based internet reporting in the age of blogs and in a cratering economy is a steep mountain to climb.
Congressman Steve Austria - the next Republican presidential candidate
This one is popping up all over the internet, but I went to the source.
From the Columbus (OH) Dispatch (emphasis mine) -
The only surprising part is that the spewer of revisionist history isn't from AZ. Have faith, however -
It's still early in the election cycle.
From the Columbus (OH) Dispatch (emphasis mine) -
U.S. Rep. Steve Austria said he supports a scaled-down federal economic-stimulus proposal, but the Beavercreek Republican told The Dispatch editorial board that the huge influx of money into the economy could have a negative effect.
"When (President Franklin) Roosevelt did this, he put our country into a Great Depression," Austria said. "He tried to borrow and spend, he tried to use the Keynesian approach, and our country ended up in a Great Depression. That's just history."
Most historians date the beginning of the Great Depression at or shortly after the stock-market crash of 1929; Roosevelt took office in 1933.
The only surprising part is that the spewer of revisionist history isn't from AZ. Have faith, however -
It's still early in the election cycle.
Mayors behaving badly...
A post wherein I criticize a couple of Democrats...
First up, we have the case of Oscar Goodman, the Democratic mayor of Las Vegas, Nevada, who's demanding the President Obama should retract and apologize for Obama's remark during a town hall meeting in Indiana that criticized the idea of the corporate recipients of federal bailout money using those funds to pay for junkets to Vegas or the Super Bowl.
President Obama's remark, courtesy an AP story (via AZCentral.com) about the Vegas mayor's indignation -
Mayor Goodman's response, from the same story -
Goodman has some credibility problems (he's a former Mob lawyer, wants to "de-thumb" and cane graffiti vandals, and ethics issues to name a few), but at least he's trying to stand up for his city. It's actually part of doing his job. He may have done so badly, but his motivation is somewhat understandable. Something that cannot be said for...
...Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon.
Yesterday, Mayor Gordon and the Phoenix City Council selected a replacement for former Councilman Greg Stanton, who had resigned in order to take a position with the Arizona Attorney General's office. Stanton is a moderate Democrat who represented Phoenix's District 6.
With Gordon's support of him, they selected former councilman Sal DiCiccio.
He's not a Democrat, nor is he "moderate" by any reading of the definition.
From the Phoenix New Times' Valley Fever piece on yesterday's events -
Hmmm...I guess Gordon's desire to run for a statewide has waned. There was some speculation last spring that his public tiff with nativist Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio was motivated by a wish to win over some of the Democratic grassroots base in preparation for a run for AG or Governor in 2010.
Putting the likes of DiCiccio back in office signals that Gordon has no intention of running for statewide office.
Well, not as a Democrat anyway.
Tedski at R-Cubed has his take on events here.
Later...
First up, we have the case of Oscar Goodman, the Democratic mayor of Las Vegas, Nevada, who's demanding the President Obama should retract and apologize for Obama's remark during a town hall meeting in Indiana that criticized the idea of the corporate recipients of federal bailout money using those funds to pay for junkets to Vegas or the Super Bowl.
President Obama's remark, courtesy an AP story (via AZCentral.com) about the Vegas mayor's indignation -
Obama made the remarks Monday during a town hall meeting in Elkhart, Ind., wherethe president traveled to muster public support for economic stimulus legislation.
"You can't get corporate jets, you can't go take a trip to Las Vegas or go down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayer's dime," Obama said.
Mayor Goodman's response, from the same story -
"That's outrageous, and he owes us an apology," he said. "He owes us a retraction."
Goodman has some credibility problems (he's a former Mob lawyer, wants to "de-thumb" and cane graffiti vandals, and ethics issues to name a few), but at least he's trying to stand up for his city. It's actually part of doing his job. He may have done so badly, but his motivation is somewhat understandable. Something that cannot be said for...
...Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon.
Yesterday, Mayor Gordon and the Phoenix City Council selected a replacement for former Councilman Greg Stanton, who had resigned in order to take a position with the Arizona Attorney General's office. Stanton is a moderate Democrat who represented Phoenix's District 6.
With Gordon's support of him, they selected former councilman Sal DiCiccio.
He's not a Democrat, nor is he "moderate" by any reading of the definition.
From the Phoenix New Times' Valley Fever piece on yesterday's events -
Before the vote, DiCiccio was questioned by Councilman Michael Nowakowski about an op-ed he wrote for the Arizona Republic two years ago, warning of the dire consequences of allowing Mexican culture to take root in this country.
DiCiccio's column began, "The current debate on immigration reform leaves out the most important issue: the importation of a corrupt culture. South of the border, you have a governmental system that allows and sometimes encourages bribery of local officials. It is no wonder that more heinous crimes follow. It is only a matter of time before a wave of violence will be coming our way. The gun battles with police; the beheadings of journalists, the kidnappings of families -- these are a line in the desert away from our country and state."
Hmmm...I guess Gordon's desire to run for a statewide has waned. There was some speculation last spring that his public tiff with nativist Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio was motivated by a wish to win over some of the Democratic grassroots base in preparation for a run for AG or Governor in 2010.
Putting the likes of DiCiccio back in office signals that Gordon has no intention of running for statewide office.
Well, not as a Democrat anyway.
Tedski at R-Cubed has his take on events here.
Later...
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
And the bloodletting deepens...
In a development that is sure to warm the hearts of Russell Pearce, John Kavanagh, and the rest of their cohorts on West Washington, ASU's President, Michael Crow, has announced some devastating responses to the budget cuts imposed by the Republicans in the state lege.
From the AZ Republic -
On Thursday, there will be a meeting of the lege's Joint Appropriations Committee concerning the FY10 budget and the universities. that will feature testimony from the president's of the state's three universities. The meeting will take place at 2:30 p.m. in House Hearing Room 1.
If you can do so, plan to attend the hearing. The university presidents need a strong show of support from the AZ community in order to fend off the sort of legislative attacks that imperil the very existence of higher ed in Arizona.
Later...
From the AZ Republic -
Arizona State University President Michael Crow today said the school will cap enrollment and close applications to next year's freshman class March 1, possibly ask for more tuition from next fall's students, close about four dozen academic programs and significantly scale back operations at its Polytechnic and West campuses, all in response to state budget reductions.A summary of some of the cuts that the state's universities have implemented (list courtesy Solutions Through Higher Education) -
And that's just for 2009. Crow said that for 2010, it's possible that both the East and West campuses could be closed entirely.
ASU
Enrollment capped, freshman applications close March 1, five months early
More than 550 staff positions and 200 faculty associate positions eliminated
Ten- to 15-day furloughs for all employees Closing of approximately four dozen academic programs Reduction of administrative operations at Polytechnic and West campuses
A reduction in the number of nursing students the university can admit
NAU
100 positions cut
Suspension of the development of new health professions programs in occupational therapy and physicians assistant, two critical area needs for the state
Closing of the Center for High Altitude Training and Social Research Laboratory Furloughs in FY09-10
Budget reductions for all departments
UA
600 position cuts (through layoffs, attrition and permanent vacancy savings)
5-day furloughs for all local and state-funded employees in FY10
Further consolidation of colleges and mergers of 50 academic and administrative units
Severe curtailment of public outreach programs, including near-closure of public access to Flandrau Science Center, Arizona State Museum, and the UA Mineral Museum
Suspension of significant portions of the UA's extension and statewide outreach programs
On Thursday, there will be a meeting of the lege's Joint Appropriations Committee concerning the FY10 budget and the universities. that will feature testimony from the president's of the state's three universities. The meeting will take place at 2:30 p.m. in House Hearing Room 1.
Later...
Monday, February 09, 2009
That's one way to lessen the impact of education cuts on students...
...fewer students, that is...
I know that state Rep. Sam Crump (R-LD6) is currently the darling of the conservatives in the AZ blogosphere. They consider him to be a better Republican than most of his namby-pamby colleagues that are solely focused on destroying public education in Arizona, but one of them is going to have to write and tell me where in the national GOP platform their party supports the idea of allowing families to burn to a gruesome and painful death in their new homes to enhance developer profits.
Even the GOP isn't so crassly corrupt as to go that far...in writing, anyway.
So what's Crump's problem?
From the Arizona Republic -
Crump's HB2267 can be found here.
Perhaps Crump's goal is to minimize the impact of cuts to school funding by removing children from the school-age population before they grow into the school-age population.
OK, that's a little over the top.
More likely, it's just a thank you to his many campaign contributors from the real estate and development sectors. When the International Code Council adopted its "sprinklers in new homes" standard in September, the home builders screamed in opposition, citing a litany of faux problems (frozen pipes, leaky pipes, increased cost to home buyers, etc.). Those excuses have been refuted here, courtesy the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA).
Crump and the Republican supporters of the bill claim that it just provides consumers with more choices - they'll still have the option of having sprinklers installed.
From the Arizona Guardian (cached, as the site is now subscription only) -
With rationalizations like that one expect to see the following on the AZGOP's hit list, and soon -
Requirements for car safety belts
Restrictions on lead paint in childrens' toys
Hazardous waste disposal regulations
The damage that the Reps are looking to wreak upon Arizona in the name of their anti-people and pro-corporate profits ideology over the next couple of years is going to take at least a generation to repair. And it will take that little time only if we start cleaning up the mess in 2010 by throwing them out during the next election.
I know that state Rep. Sam Crump (R-LD6) is currently the darling of the conservatives in the AZ blogosphere. They consider him to be a better Republican than most of his namby-pamby colleagues that are solely focused on destroying public education in Arizona, but one of them is going to have to write and tell me where in the national GOP platform their party supports the idea of allowing families to burn to a gruesome and painful death in their new homes to enhance developer profits.
Even the GOP isn't so crassly corrupt as to go that far...in writing, anyway.
So what's Crump's problem?
From the Arizona Republic -
House bill would prohibit home-sprinkler mandates
Calling it an issue of consumer choice, Rep. Sam Crump is sponsoring a bill that would prohibit municipalities from passing ordinances to require sprinklers in new, detached single-family homes.
"There's always people every year at every level of government that have good ideas of what they want people to do," Crump said. "We want to keep it in the consumer's realm of choices."
Crump, R-Anthem, also said he wants to avoid a patchwork of different rules in different communities.
Crump's HB2267 can be found here.
Perhaps Crump's goal is to minimize the impact of cuts to school funding by removing children from the school-age population before they grow into the school-age population.
OK, that's a little over the top.
More likely, it's just a thank you to his many campaign contributors from the real estate and development sectors. When the International Code Council adopted its "sprinklers in new homes" standard in September, the home builders screamed in opposition, citing a litany of faux problems (frozen pipes, leaky pipes, increased cost to home buyers, etc.). Those excuses have been refuted here, courtesy the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA).
Crump and the Republican supporters of the bill claim that it just provides consumers with more choices - they'll still have the option of having sprinklers installed.
From the Arizona Guardian (cached, as the site is now subscription only) -
Other GOP lawmakers said it wasn't the job of government to protect everyone by heaping expensive regulations on home buyers.
"I don't think it's the government's job to protect people from cradle to grave," said Rep. Frank Antenori, R-Tucson.
With rationalizations like that one expect to see the following on the AZGOP's hit list, and soon -
Requirements for car safety belts
Restrictions on lead paint in childrens' toys
Hazardous waste disposal regulations
The damage that the Reps are looking to wreak upon Arizona in the name of their anti-people and pro-corporate profits ideology over the next couple of years is going to take at least a generation to repair. And it will take that little time only if we start cleaning up the mess in 2010 by throwing them out during the next election.
Education Rally At The State Capitol Saturday
Courtesy the Arizona School Boards Association -
Arizona needs YOU now!
Statehood Day
RALLY
FOR EDUCATION
Saturday, Feb. 14, 2009
11 a.m.—1 p.m.
Arizona State Capitol
Governor’s Tower Parking Lot, 1700 W. Washington St., Phoenix
Ample parking is available in the Governor’s Tower lot, located at 19th Ave. between Jefferson
and Adams and in the parking garage behind the state offices just north of the Capitol.
Organized with the support of the Arizona Association of School Business Officials, Arizona School
Administrators and Arizona School Boards Association.
Bring VALENTINES for GOVERNOR BREWER and your
LEGISLATORS and put them in the giant Valentines Box!
Be sure to include positive messages
about K-12 education on them!!!
Bring your STORIES about what public education means to you!
Bring your CHILDREN and GRANDCHILDREN!
Bring your FRIENDS, NEIGHBORS and COWORKERS!
Bring SIGNS—Let’s make sure our elected officials know
supporting K-12 EDUCATION IS A TOP PRIORITY for Arizona!
I like the "Valentines" touch myself. :))
Arizona needs YOU now!
Statehood Day
RALLY
FOR EDUCATION
Saturday, Feb. 14, 2009
11 a.m.—1 p.m.
Arizona State Capitol
Governor’s Tower Parking Lot, 1700 W. Washington St., Phoenix
Ample parking is available in the Governor’s Tower lot, located at 19th Ave. between Jefferson
and Adams and in the parking garage behind the state offices just north of the Capitol.
Organized with the support of the Arizona Association of School Business Officials, Arizona School
Administrators and Arizona School Boards Association.
Bring VALENTINES for GOVERNOR BREWER and your
LEGISLATORS and put them in the giant Valentines Box!
Be sure to include positive messages
about K-12 education on them!!!
Bring your STORIES about what public education means to you!
Bring your CHILDREN and GRANDCHILDREN!
Bring your FRIENDS, NEIGHBORS and COWORKERS!
Bring SIGNS—Let’s make sure our elected officials know
supporting K-12 EDUCATION IS A TOP PRIORITY for Arizona!
I like the "Valentines" touch myself. :))
And the first one out of the gate is...Tim Willis???
Jan Brewer, Jeff Flake, and the other Republicans rumored to be interested in running for governor next year can just hang it up now - the race for the Republican nomination for governor next year is all over but for the actual, you know, voting.
During a visit to the Secretary of State's website, I came across the committee info for the only currently organized committee for a gubernortorial run in 2010.
Meet Samuel Timothy Willis, running as Tim Willis.
Having never heard of him, I performed some intensive research* into his background.
* = Googled him. :)
Details from his campaign website -
He lives in Wickenburg and is the pastor of a church in Congress, Arizona. (Interesting note - Congress, AZ is also the home of recently convicted and defeated Republican U.S. Senator Ted Stevens, formerly of Alaska.)
His wife, Barbara, is the President of Crisis Pregnancy Centers, based in AZ. (CPC is an anti-choice organization fronting as a medical clinic. Donna at Democratic Diva has a post on the organization here. NARAL has info here.)
He thinks that the state budget is spent "frivolously" and that state government is "bloated" and that state employees should miss a few paychecks. In addition, he thinks that the governor (Jan Brewer), state treasurer (Dean Martin) and the head of the Department of Administration (William Bell) are "out of control spendthrifts." HUH?!?
He believes that the state's budget should be balanced by cutting programs that are "important to liberals."
He thinks that state government agency heads have cut services to taxpayers in order to continue supporting undocumented immigrants. This is better than anything I could make up if I was creating a candidate in a satire.
He's a big fan of tinkle-down economics (the farther down you are in the economic food chain, the more tinkle lands on you), as he thinks that wealthy people getting dressed up for a party and hiring servants for that party is a good way to stimulate the economy.
He worked for a distributing company before becoming a pastor in the 1980s. Since then, all of his listed experience is related to that line of work.
To sum up:
He has no political experience, nor does he have experience in overseeing a large organization (his website claims that the congregation of his church numbers fewer than 100 members).
He's a hardcore social winger who blames "liberals" for all that ails AZ. He makes Len Munsil look like a bleeding heart.
He has absolultely no clue about how fiscally lean AZ government was even *before* the current budget crisis.
In short, he's the wet dream of the "kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out" branch of the Republican Party, and he *will* win the support of the Randy Pullen-led AZGOP.
...OK, OK - even a dyed-in-the-wool liberal like me doesn't actually believe Willis will get the Rep nomination next year.
However, having fringe Rep candidates already crawling out of the woodwork can only help the Democrats regain the 9th floor of the Capitol, and help AZ get back on the path to fiscal and political sanity.
It's even likely that this blog post will be the high point in his campaign's public profile.
Of course, if his candidacy *does* gain a foothold, every Dem in the state who's ever aspired to the governor's office will be lining up to run against him.
Yup, it's going to be a fun year and two-thirds. :))
Later!
During a visit to the Secretary of State's website, I came across the committee info for the only currently organized committee for a gubernortorial run in 2010.
Meet Samuel Timothy Willis, running as Tim Willis.
Having never heard of him, I performed some intensive research* into his background.
* = Googled him. :)
Details from his campaign website -
He lives in Wickenburg and is the pastor of a church in Congress, Arizona. (Interesting note - Congress, AZ is also the home of recently convicted and defeated Republican U.S. Senator Ted Stevens, formerly of Alaska.)
His wife, Barbara, is the President of Crisis Pregnancy Centers, based in AZ. (CPC is an anti-choice organization fronting as a medical clinic. Donna at Democratic Diva has a post on the organization here. NARAL has info here.)
He thinks that the state budget is spent "frivolously" and that state government is "bloated" and that state employees should miss a few paychecks. In addition, he thinks that the governor (Jan Brewer), state treasurer (Dean Martin) and the head of the Department of Administration (William Bell) are "out of control spendthrifts." HUH?!?
He believes that the state's budget should be balanced by cutting programs that are "important to liberals."
He thinks that state government agency heads have cut services to taxpayers in order to continue supporting undocumented immigrants. This is better than anything I could make up if I was creating a candidate in a satire.
He's a big fan of tinkle-down economics (the farther down you are in the economic food chain, the more tinkle lands on you), as he thinks that wealthy people getting dressed up for a party and hiring servants for that party is a good way to stimulate the economy.
He worked for a distributing company before becoming a pastor in the 1980s. Since then, all of his listed experience is related to that line of work.
To sum up:
He has no political experience, nor does he have experience in overseeing a large organization (his website claims that the congregation of his church numbers fewer than 100 members).
He's a hardcore social winger who blames "liberals" for all that ails AZ. He makes Len Munsil look like a bleeding heart.
He has absolultely no clue about how fiscally lean AZ government was even *before* the current budget crisis.
In short, he's the wet dream of the "kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out" branch of the Republican Party, and he *will* win the support of the Randy Pullen-led AZGOP.
...OK, OK - even a dyed-in-the-wool liberal like me doesn't actually believe Willis will get the Rep nomination next year.
However, having fringe Rep candidates already crawling out of the woodwork can only help the Democrats regain the 9th floor of the Capitol, and help AZ get back on the path to fiscal and political sanity.
It's even likely that this blog post will be the high point in his campaign's public profile.
Of course, if his candidacy *does* gain a foothold, every Dem in the state who's ever aspired to the governor's office will be lining up to run against him.
Yup, it's going to be a fun year and two-thirds. :))
Later!
Sunday, February 08, 2009
Russell Pearce - an honest man? Who'da thunk it?
For all of the criticisms leveled at State Senator Russell Pearce (R-National Alliance), nobody can claim that Pearce is sneaky or even subtle.
Unless someone thinks that the ideological equivalent of a lynch mob is 'subtle.'
Earlier this week, The Arizona Guardian ran a budget-related story in which Pearce gave the quote of the year (and it's only February!) -
In that quote, he was discussing the job-creating merits of his laissez-faire approach to business regulations and taxes (aka - "none"), but he could have just as easily been discussing his approach to dealing with public education in Arizona.
Some of the bills he has sponsored or co-sponsored through the years...
SB1331 (47th/2nd) - Would have mandated that public school districts create alternative coursework for students who deem regular coursework "offensive."
..."If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it..."
HB2487 (47th/2nd) - Would have created a special commission to study private postsecondary education capacity in Arizona, and the expansion of that capacity.
..."If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it..."
HB2253 (47th/2nd) - There's a tax credit allowed for taxpayer contributions to public schools. This bill allowed donations to be used for fine arts instruction, but included a provision that the monies donated could not be used to pay the teachers, staff, or administrators needed to actually run such classes.
..."If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it..."
SB1108 (Amendment) (48th/2nd) - Would have banned diversity education in AZ's public schools, K-12 and higher ed. Only pro-American and pro-Western civilization teachings allowed. AZRepublic news story here.
..."If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it..."
SB1214 (48th/2nd) - Concealed weapons in schools. Allowing them. Ugh.
..."If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it..."
SCR1008 (49th/1st) - Would mandate that public school districts spend 65% of their budgets on classroom expenditures. No flexibility at all.
..."If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it..."
HB2248 (47th/2nd) - Would have barred schools from requiring that teachers know a language other than English, unless their job was to specifically teach a foreign language. School systems like that in Nogales that have a student population that is over 98% Hispanic - stuck with English-only teachers to communicate with students and their families.
..."If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it..."
HB2583 (47th/2nd) - An unfunded mandate to compel public schools to place an American flag and a copy of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights in every classroom. Specifically exempted private, parochial, and home schools. (My personal favorite. :)) )
..."If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it..."
...And that's a less than comprehensive list that only goes back a few years, and doesn't include his many "anti-brown skinned students" measures, which are more about his nativist tendencies than about causing havoc in AZ's schools (though he isn't complaining about the 'havoc' aspects of his proposals.)
So if Pearce thinks that the best way to "increase" something (and education certainly is 'something,' isn't it?) is to "deregulate" it, and he is so supportive of education (or so he claims), why does he keep trying to add regulations, rules, and costs for public education?
Don't bother answering, because that's a rhetorical question. Between the history of his attempts to interfere with or undermine public education illustrated above, his hatchet job on public ed this year while funnelling anti-immigrant funding to fellow nativist Joe Arpaio, or his annual attempts to significantly defund public ed with a permanent repeal of the state's equalization property tax, his intent has always been clear -
End public education in Arizona.
Give him a few more years of a Republican majority in the state legislature and a Rep in the governor's office, and higher ed in AZ will consist of the University of Phoenix (a privately-owned business degree mill) and the fly-by-night "schools" of cosmetology and massage therapy that fill Arizona's strip malls.
Enough already. If the voters in Mesa wanted to elected Pearce to the Mesa City Council, that would be fine. It's their city and they can keep running it into the ground if they want. However, they keep foisting off Pearce and his destructive ideology on the rest of the state.
That should be a call to arms for the rest of the state. Perhaps we can't defeat Pearce in his own district (though that would be nice...VERY nice), but we can take control of the lege and the governor's office and effectively marginalize Pearce and his ilk.
And to ensure Arizona's future, we must do so, and do so in 2010 when all of the legislative offices, as well as most of the statewide offices, are on the ballot.
Contact the Arizona Democratic Party, the Maricopa County Democratic Party, the LD18 Democrats, or your local Democratic organization (lists here and here) and volunteer your time or financial support.
David Safier at Blog of Arizona has continuing coverage of the attacks by AZ's Republicans on education, and Randall Amster at The Huffington Post has a great summary of the situation here in AZ here.
Later....
Unless someone thinks that the ideological equivalent of a lynch mob is 'subtle.'
Earlier this week, The Arizona Guardian ran a budget-related story in which Pearce gave the quote of the year (and it's only February!) -
"If you want to get rid of something, you tax it. If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it," he said. The budget cuts made last week will not cause any "real layoffs," he said.
In that quote, he was discussing the job-creating merits of his laissez-faire approach to business regulations and taxes (aka - "none"), but he could have just as easily been discussing his approach to dealing with public education in Arizona.
Some of the bills he has sponsored or co-sponsored through the years...
SB1331 (47th/2nd) - Would have mandated that public school districts create alternative coursework for students who deem regular coursework "offensive."
..."If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it..."
HB2487 (47th/2nd) - Would have created a special commission to study private postsecondary education capacity in Arizona, and the expansion of that capacity.
..."If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it..."
HB2253 (47th/2nd) - There's a tax credit allowed for taxpayer contributions to public schools. This bill allowed donations to be used for fine arts instruction, but included a provision that the monies donated could not be used to pay the teachers, staff, or administrators needed to actually run such classes.
..."If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it..."
SB1108 (Amendment) (48th/2nd) - Would have banned diversity education in AZ's public schools, K-12 and higher ed. Only pro-American and pro-Western civilization teachings allowed. AZRepublic news story here.
..."If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it..."
SB1214 (48th/2nd) - Concealed weapons in schools. Allowing them. Ugh.
..."If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it..."
SCR1008 (49th/1st) - Would mandate that public school districts spend 65% of their budgets on classroom expenditures. No flexibility at all.
..."If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it..."
HB2248 (47th/2nd) - Would have barred schools from requiring that teachers know a language other than English, unless their job was to specifically teach a foreign language. School systems like that in Nogales that have a student population that is over 98% Hispanic - stuck with English-only teachers to communicate with students and their families.
..."If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it..."
HB2583 (47th/2nd) - An unfunded mandate to compel public schools to place an American flag and a copy of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights in every classroom. Specifically exempted private, parochial, and home schools. (My personal favorite. :)) )
..."If you want to increase something, then deregulate and untax it..."
...And that's a less than comprehensive list that only goes back a few years, and doesn't include his many "anti-brown skinned students" measures, which are more about his nativist tendencies than about causing havoc in AZ's schools (though he isn't complaining about the 'havoc' aspects of his proposals.)
So if Pearce thinks that the best way to "increase" something (and education certainly is 'something,' isn't it?) is to "deregulate" it, and he is so supportive of education (or so he claims), why does he keep trying to add regulations, rules, and costs for public education?
Don't bother answering, because that's a rhetorical question. Between the history of his attempts to interfere with or undermine public education illustrated above, his hatchet job on public ed this year while funnelling anti-immigrant funding to fellow nativist Joe Arpaio, or his annual attempts to significantly defund public ed with a permanent repeal of the state's equalization property tax, his intent has always been clear -
End public education in Arizona.
Give him a few more years of a Republican majority in the state legislature and a Rep in the governor's office, and higher ed in AZ will consist of the University of Phoenix (a privately-owned business degree mill) and the fly-by-night "schools" of cosmetology and massage therapy that fill Arizona's strip malls.
Enough already. If the voters in Mesa wanted to elected Pearce to the Mesa City Council, that would be fine. It's their city and they can keep running it into the ground if they want. However, they keep foisting off Pearce and his destructive ideology on the rest of the state.
That should be a call to arms for the rest of the state. Perhaps we can't defeat Pearce in his own district (though that would be nice...VERY nice), but we can take control of the lege and the governor's office and effectively marginalize Pearce and his ilk.
And to ensure Arizona's future, we must do so, and do so in 2010 when all of the legislative offices, as well as most of the statewide offices, are on the ballot.
Contact the Arizona Democratic Party, the Maricopa County Democratic Party, the LD18 Democrats, or your local Democratic organization (lists here and here) and volunteer your time or financial support.
David Safier at Blog of Arizona has continuing coverage of the attacks by AZ's Republicans on education, and Randall Amster at The Huffington Post has a great summary of the situation here in AZ here.
Later....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)