A state judge on Tuesday blocked implementation of several key parts of a new Arizona law restricting abortions, while allowing a few provisions to take effect.The Center for Arizona Policy and their water carriers on West Washington have already promised to continue their fight enact a de facto revocation of a woman's right to control their own bodies, so stay tuned. If all or part of the new laws are struck down permanently, expect them to return in some form in the new session of the lege in January.
The preliminary injunction issued by Judge Donald Daughton of Maricopa County Superior Court allows a 24-hour waiting period to take affect, but he blocked requirements that a woman see a doctor in person for advance disclosures before getting an abortion.
{snip}
The state judge also blocked provisions prohibiting nurse practitioners from performing surgical abortions, requiring the notarizing of parental consent forms and expanding an existing law that now permits health-care workers to refuse to participate in abortions.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Arizona court slaps down most of the lege's misogynistic anti-abortion laws
From AZCentral.com -
There are five more Republicans in DC tonight...
...and they joined the Soullessly Corrupt wing of the GOP.
From the New York Times (emphasis mine) -
It's still frustrating though - one of the reasons that Democrats have a majority in both chambers of Congress (and one of the reasons that I personally am a proud Democrat) is that in 2006 and 2008, we could point to the Republicans and their outright sellout of America and Americans to corporate interests and say "that's not us."
Tonight it is us.
If you live in a district represented by a Democratic Congressman/woman, contact them now and let them know that if they truly support the best interests of their constituents, they will push for and support a health care reform bill that contains a viable and robust public health insurance option.
Anything less is no reform at all.
Gabrielle Giffords (CD8) has a contact form here
Raul Grijalva (CD7) here
Ann Kirkpatrick (CD1) here
Ed Pastor (CD4) here
Harry Mitchell (CD5) here
Later...
From the New York Times (emphasis mine) -
After a half-day of animated debate, the Senate Finance Committee on Tuesday rejected efforts by liberal Democrats to add a government-run health insurance plan to major health care legislation, dealing the first official setback to an idea that many Democrats, including President Obama, say they support.This development isn't the end of the debate on a public option, in fact it was expected - the committee chair Baucus has staunchly opposed a public option (surely he hasn't been influenced by the hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions that he has received from health insurers over the years, right?), so one was never going to get through his committee.
All of the other versions of the health care legislation advancing in Congress — a bill approved by the Senate health committee and a trio of bills in the House — include some version of the government-run plan, or public option.
{snip}
The committee on Tuesday afternoon voted, 15 to 8, to reject an amendment proposed by Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, Democrat of West Virginia, to add a public option called the Community Choice Health Plan, an outcome that underscored the lack of support for a government plan among many Democrats.
Mr. Baucus voted no, as did Senators Thomas R. Carper of Delaware, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, and Bill Nelson of Florida, joining all 10 Republicans in opposition.
It's still frustrating though - one of the reasons that Democrats have a majority in both chambers of Congress (and one of the reasons that I personally am a proud Democrat) is that in 2006 and 2008, we could point to the Republicans and their outright sellout of America and Americans to corporate interests and say "that's not us."
Tonight it is us.
If you live in a district represented by a Democratic Congressman/woman, contact them now and let them know that if they truly support the best interests of their constituents, they will push for and support a health care reform bill that contains a viable and robust public health insurance option.
Anything less is no reform at all.
Gabrielle Giffords (CD8) has a contact form here
Raul Grijalva (CD7) here
Ann Kirkpatrick (CD1) here
Ed Pastor (CD4) here
Harry Mitchell (CD5) here
Later...
Monday, September 28, 2009
Fear and Loathing in Phoenix - state Sen. Sylvia Allen on climate change
On Monday, State Sen. Sylvia Allen (R-6000 years) held a meeting of her anti-science committee (aka the Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Climate Initiatives).
The agenda featured a number of industry lobbyists presenting to an "adjusted" committee membership (Chuck Gray and Russell Pearce were added to the committee late last week).
With a mix like that (Allen, industry lobbyists, and Pearce and Gray) expectations were low at the outset of the hearing, and it lived down to those expectations.
It was clear from that outset that this meeting was not concerned with science, Allen made that clear in her opening remarks when she pointedly thanked "business leaders" for attending.
Allen herself set the tone for the meeting, also in her opening remarks, when she announced that she was "quite frightened" by the initiatives to address climate change.
The other speakers tapped into that fear vein.
Michael Curtis of the Arizona Municipal Power Users Association railed against H.R. 2454, better known as Waxman/Markey or the "American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009."
He objected to the bill's "economy-wide approach" and derided it as a "transfer of wealth."
Kimball Rasmussen of Deseret Power (Utah), a long-time skeptic of climate change, reiterated the wealth transfer theme, as well as creating an "us vs. them" atmosphere, with small states vs. big states and middle states vs. the coasts (aka - red vs. blue states).
Craig Idso, chair of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, argued that climate change was real, but that higher temps and increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere would be good for plants. He disregarded the impact of increased CO2 levels on human and animal life. It wouldn't be good (see the atmosphere of Venus).
Chuck Gray (R-East Mesa) served up a softball question, asking the presenters what the lege could do to facilitate the construction of a nuclear plant or oil refinery in Arizona.
One presenter advised him to put aside safeguards (you know, safety standards and such are such an unnecessary drag on corporate profit margins) and another advised him to short circuit the Arizona Corporation Commission's permitting process.
When all was said and done, Sylvia Allen though had the best line of the day -
Apparently, Sen. Allen pays as much attention to the finer nuances of economic theory as she does to those of scientific theory.
Well, that's assuming that the basic tenets of Marxism qualify as a "finer nuance."
The agenda featured a number of industry lobbyists presenting to an "adjusted" committee membership (Chuck Gray and Russell Pearce were added to the committee late last week).
With a mix like that (Allen, industry lobbyists, and Pearce and Gray) expectations were low at the outset of the hearing, and it lived down to those expectations.
It was clear from that outset that this meeting was not concerned with science, Allen made that clear in her opening remarks when she pointedly thanked "business leaders" for attending.
Allen herself set the tone for the meeting, also in her opening remarks, when she announced that she was "quite frightened" by the initiatives to address climate change.
The other speakers tapped into that fear vein.
Michael Curtis of the Arizona Municipal Power Users Association railed against H.R. 2454, better known as Waxman/Markey or the "American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009."
He objected to the bill's "economy-wide approach" and derided it as a "transfer of wealth."
Kimball Rasmussen of Deseret Power (Utah), a long-time skeptic of climate change, reiterated the wealth transfer theme, as well as creating an "us vs. them" atmosphere, with small states vs. big states and middle states vs. the coasts (aka - red vs. blue states).
Craig Idso, chair of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, argued that climate change was real, but that higher temps and increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere would be good for plants. He disregarded the impact of increased CO2 levels on human and animal life. It wouldn't be good (see the atmosphere of Venus).
Chuck Gray (R-East Mesa) served up a softball question, asking the presenters what the lege could do to facilitate the construction of a nuclear plant or oil refinery in Arizona.
One presenter advised him to put aside safeguards (you know, safety standards and such are such an unnecessary drag on corporate profit margins) and another advised him to short circuit the Arizona Corporation Commission's permitting process.
When all was said and done, Sylvia Allen though had the best line of the day -
Socialism and Marxism are about concentrating the wealth in the hands of the few who are going to make billions off of this cap and trade scheme
Apparently, Sen. Allen pays as much attention to the finer nuances of economic theory as she does to those of scientific theory.
Well, that's assuming that the basic tenets of Marxism qualify as a "finer nuance."
Sylvia Allen's anti-science hearing going on now
So far, it is going as expected, with the presenter who is supposed to inform the panel about current federal legislation related to climate change instead engaging in a diatribe against all such legislation.
Go to the lege's video page and select "view live proceedings."
Go to the lege's video page and select "view live proceedings."
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Question of the day
From AZCentral.com -
Could somebody explain something to me?
How is it that the Republicans in the lege think that guns are safe enough to force them into schools, bars, and others' private property, all places where a majority of the people present will have no clue about handling dangerous weapons, yet people in a place where the the vast majority (if not all) of the folks present are experts on the safe handling of weapons are in immediate danger from those very same "safe" weapons?
Welcome to Arizona, the place where blind ideology trumps stark reality.
Dealer accidentally fires gun, injures 2 at gun show
A woman and a girl received minor injuries when a gun dealer inadvertently fired a loaded handgun during a gun show in Mesa late Saturday morning, police said.
Police responded to the Mesa Convention Center about 11:30 a.m. to a call of a shot being fired during a gun show, said Det. Mike Melendez, a police spokesman.
Investigators learned that a presenter at the gun show brought a loaded gun into the event, which is not permitted, Melendez said.
Could somebody explain something to me?
How is it that the Republicans in the lege think that guns are safe enough to force them into schools, bars, and others' private property, all places where a majority of the people present will have no clue about handling dangerous weapons, yet people in a place where the the vast majority (if not all) of the folks present are experts on the safe handling of weapons are in immediate danger from those very same "safe" weapons?
Welcome to Arizona, the place where blind ideology trumps stark reality.
The coming week...
As usual, except where noted, all info gathered from the websites of the relevent political bodies/agencies, and subject to change without notice.
The normal format of these posts is a simple one - start with the highest level of government (federal) and work down. This week, a slight change to that template is merited.
...The Arizona Legislature is still out of session and the budget still isn't balanced. However, they still have the time and energy to canoodle with some industry lobbyists in a propaganda session.
From a press release from the Senate Republicans, posted on the lege's website -
Zwick appears to be the token "non-industry lobbyist" on the panel. However, she is not a scientist.
Sen. Sylvia Allen is the Arizona politician best known for her deep understanding of science. Or not.
The meeting is at the Senate in SHR1 from 8:30 - noon.
...In the U.S. House of Representatives, the agenda looks to be fairly light on controversial floor action, though not without some (hey, this wouldn't be the House if they didn't have stuff to yell at each other over.)
Of interest to AZers -
- Rep. Raul Grijalva's H.R. 1333, "To amend chapter 40 of title 18, United States Code, to exempt the transportation, shipment, receipt, or importation of explosive materials for delivery to a federally recognized Indian tribe or an agency of such a tribe from various Federal criminal prohibitions relating to explosives." Heard under suspension of the rules.
- Conference report on H.R. 3183, Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010. This is money-related, so it is likely the most controversial matter subject to floor action this week. House Report 111-203 on the bill, including earmarks and "directed spending" is here.
...Over in the U.S, Senate, floor action will focus on Defense Appropriations. Committee hearing schedule here. The highlight, or at least the one that will receive the most attention, is the Senate Finance Committee's continued consideration of Max Baucus'Health Insurer Wish List health care reform bill.
...On Tuesday, the Arizona Corporation Commission is holding a special open meeting in Yuma related to APS and rates. Full hearing schedule here.
...The Board of Directors of the Maricopa Integrated Health System is holding two special meetings on Monday. The noon meeting has an executive session component and general session discussion on contract renegotiations with MedPro and an employment agreement with Betsey Bayless, current MIHS CEO. The meeting at 5 p.m. covers approval of the new MedPro contract.
...The Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project has a busy week planned.
- On Wednesday, there will be a joint meeting of the CAP Board and the Board of Directors of the Arizona Municipal Waters Users Association at the Embassy Suites Phoenix Biltmore.
- Thursday, there will be a meeting of the Central Arizona Groundwater Replenishment District and Underground Storage Committee immediately following the regular meeting of the CAP Board.
- Thursday, there will be a meeting of the Board's Public Policy Committee at 9 a.m. (aka - immediately before the regular Board meeting.)
- And, of course, the full Board will meet in open and executive session on Thursday.
...The Tempe City Council isn't scheduled to meet this week, but a calendar of Council-related events is here.
...The Scottsdale City Council will be holding a joint meeting with Budget Review Commission on Tuesday. There will also be a special meeting of the Council with an executive session concerning the interim treasurer appointment/hiring mess. Scottsdale's community meeting calendar is here.
Not scheduled to meet this week: Citizens Clean Elections Commission, Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (though an executive session called on short notice would be the norm for this group), Arizona Board of Regents, Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District.
Later...
The normal format of these posts is a simple one - start with the highest level of government (federal) and work down. This week, a slight change to that template is merited.
...The Arizona Legislature is still out of session and the budget still isn't balanced. However, they still have the time and energy to canoodle with some industry lobbyists in a propaganda session.
From a press release from the Senate Republicans, posted on the lege's website -
The Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Climate Initiatives is holding its second meeting Monday. Committee Chair Sylvia Allen contends federal proposals targeted at global warming are quickly moving forward without consideration for scientific evidence and we are going after problems that do not exist. She wants Arizonans to understand how cap and trade regulations will impact their energy supply and utility costs. “They need to evaluate the claims behind 'green jobs' and climate scare tactics,” she said. The agenda includes an update of federal legislation and an economic forecast/industry roundtable. The committee’s first meeting was June 8.The list of "distinguished" panelists includes: Michael Curtis, executive secretary, Arizona Municipal Power Users’ Association; Kimball Rasmussen, CEO, Deseret Power; Dr. Craig Idso, chairman, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change; Cynthia Zwick, president, Arizona Community Action Association; Cathy Reheis-Boyd, COO, Western State Petroleum Association; and Steven Regis, vice president of engineering services, CalPortland Company.
Zwick appears to be the token "non-industry lobbyist" on the panel. However, she is not a scientist.
Sen. Sylvia Allen is the Arizona politician best known for her deep understanding of science. Or not.
The meeting is at the Senate in SHR1 from 8:30 - noon.
...In the U.S. House of Representatives, the agenda looks to be fairly light on controversial floor action, though not without some (hey, this wouldn't be the House if they didn't have stuff to yell at each other over.)
Of interest to AZers -
- Rep. Raul Grijalva's H.R. 1333, "To amend chapter 40 of title 18, United States Code, to exempt the transportation, shipment, receipt, or importation of explosive materials for delivery to a federally recognized Indian tribe or an agency of such a tribe from various Federal criminal prohibitions relating to explosives." Heard under suspension of the rules.
- Conference report on H.R. 3183, Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010. This is money-related, so it is likely the most controversial matter subject to floor action this week. House Report 111-203 on the bill, including earmarks and "directed spending" is here.
...Over in the U.S, Senate, floor action will focus on Defense Appropriations. Committee hearing schedule here. The highlight, or at least the one that will receive the most attention, is the Senate Finance Committee's continued consideration of Max Baucus'
...On Tuesday, the Arizona Corporation Commission is holding a special open meeting in Yuma related to APS and rates. Full hearing schedule here.
...The Board of Directors of the Maricopa Integrated Health System is holding two special meetings on Monday. The noon meeting has an executive session component and general session discussion on contract renegotiations with MedPro and an employment agreement with Betsey Bayless, current MIHS CEO. The meeting at 5 p.m. covers approval of the new MedPro contract.
...The Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project has a busy week planned.
- On Wednesday, there will be a joint meeting of the CAP Board and the Board of Directors of the Arizona Municipal Waters Users Association at the Embassy Suites Phoenix Biltmore.
- Thursday, there will be a meeting of the Central Arizona Groundwater Replenishment District and Underground Storage Committee immediately following the regular meeting of the CAP Board.
- Thursday, there will be a meeting of the Board's Public Policy Committee at 9 a.m. (aka - immediately before the regular Board meeting.)
- And, of course, the full Board will meet in open and executive session on Thursday.
...The Tempe City Council isn't scheduled to meet this week, but a calendar of Council-related events is here.
...The Scottsdale City Council will be holding a joint meeting with Budget Review Commission on Tuesday. There will also be a special meeting of the Council with an executive session concerning the interim treasurer appointment/hiring mess. Scottsdale's community meeting calendar is here.
Not scheduled to meet this week: Citizens Clean Elections Commission, Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (though an executive session called on short notice would be the norm for this group), Arizona Board of Regents, Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District.
Later...
Saturday, September 26, 2009
More 2010 campaign committees...
Edit on 9/28 to update with candidate info...
Another in the heretofore irregularly timed series of posts (but one which will probably become a regular weekly topic for the foreseeable future)...
- Republican Vernon Parker, mayor of Paradise Valley, has opened an exploratory committee for a run at the Governor's job. He's had some legal issues, but he is a credible candidate.
- Republican State Senator Thayer Verschoor has opened an exploratory committee for a run at State Treasurer, apparently assuming that Dean Martin, a fellow Republican and the incumbent, is going to run for Governor.
- Republican Beth Price has formed a committee for a run at Superintendent of Public Instruction. The committee address is in Casa Grande, and she used to work at Central Arizona College (page 4 of the linked .pdf). I'm not sure about her current activities. Her name makes for lousy search terms.
She joins a cast of thousands in next year's Rep primary for the post (actually the number is five, for now).
- In LD8, one W. John Williamson, no party listed, has formed a $500 Threshold committee for a run at state representative. Another name that makes for lousy search terms, but I'll call the number on his committee paperwork later this week.
Update on 9/28 - Mr. Williamson returned my call and graciously spoke to me about his candidacy. He's running as a Democrat and his focus is on education. He is a 40+ year Arizonan who graduated from Saguaro High and ASU. Currently, he is a high school English teacher and is concerned about the "punitive tone" exhibited by the lege and the leadership there toward education and teachers. (See the BRB language [page 62 of the linked .pdf] regarding teachers and professional association activities [i.e. - union activities] and barring compensated days for such activities being part of district contracts). He's going to "try to make a difference."
I wish him well with that and with his candidacy.
End update...
- And, in the "blast from the past" portion of our program, the "legendary" David Burnell Smith, the first sitting legislator to be removed from office for violating Clean Elections rules, is again running for state representative from LD7. There are already five Republicans running for the two state rep slots from LD7, including an "exploring" Jim Waring, the soon-to-be termed out state senator from the LD. With his history and the crowded field, Mr. Smith has a seriously uphill battle, even in a group at morally bereft as the AZGOP.
...Other committees -
- Dean Martin, well into his third year as State Treasurer, has finally gotten around to opening an "officeholder expense" committee, named "Treasurer Dean Martin Community Service."
Either he never had any officeholder expenses before this or he's running for Governor.
Guess which one I think it is?
:)
Later...
Another in the heretofore irregularly timed series of posts (but one which will probably become a regular weekly topic for the foreseeable future)...
- Republican Vernon Parker, mayor of Paradise Valley, has opened an exploratory committee for a run at the Governor's job. He's had some legal issues, but he is a credible candidate.
- Republican State Senator Thayer Verschoor has opened an exploratory committee for a run at State Treasurer, apparently assuming that Dean Martin, a fellow Republican and the incumbent, is going to run for Governor.
- Republican Beth Price has formed a committee for a run at Superintendent of Public Instruction. The committee address is in Casa Grande, and she used to work at Central Arizona College (page 4 of the linked .pdf). I'm not sure about her current activities. Her name makes for lousy search terms.
She joins a cast of thousands in next year's Rep primary for the post (actually the number is five, for now).
- In LD8, one W. John Williamson, no party listed, has formed a $500 Threshold committee for a run at state representative. Another name that makes for lousy search terms, but I'll call the number on his committee paperwork later this week.
Update on 9/28 - Mr. Williamson returned my call and graciously spoke to me about his candidacy. He's running as a Democrat and his focus is on education. He is a 40+ year Arizonan who graduated from Saguaro High and ASU. Currently, he is a high school English teacher and is concerned about the "punitive tone" exhibited by the lege and the leadership there toward education and teachers. (See the BRB language [page 62 of the linked .pdf] regarding teachers and professional association activities [i.e. - union activities] and barring compensated days for such activities being part of district contracts). He's going to "try to make a difference."
I wish him well with that and with his candidacy.
End update...
- And, in the "blast from the past" portion of our program, the "legendary" David Burnell Smith, the first sitting legislator to be removed from office for violating Clean Elections rules, is again running for state representative from LD7. There are already five Republicans running for the two state rep slots from LD7, including an "exploring" Jim Waring, the soon-to-be termed out state senator from the LD. With his history and the crowded field, Mr. Smith has a seriously uphill battle, even in a group at morally bereft as the AZGOP.
...Other committees -
- Dean Martin, well into his third year as State Treasurer, has finally gotten around to opening an "officeholder expense" committee, named "Treasurer Dean Martin Community Service."
Either he never had any officeholder expenses before this or he's running for Governor.
Guess which one I think it is?
:)
Later...
Thursday, September 24, 2009
NIBW Update - contaminated water release on September 23, 2009
From an email from Rachel Loftin, project manager for the North Indian Bend Wash Superfund area, to the NIBW Community Involvement Group -
My work week has started, so I won't be able to follow up on this until next week at the earliest. For more information, please contact Ms. Loftin at the above number.
Later...
Dear NIBW Community Involvement Group:
I am Rachel Loftin, the new EPA Project Manager for the Indian Bend Wash site, and I'd like to share information with you regarding a release that occurred yesterday, September 23, 2009, at Well PCX-1, a groundwater extraction well that pumps water to be treated at the Miller Road Treatment Facility (MRTF).
Here's what EPA has learned from the Salt River Project:
First, and most importantly, we want you to know that the spill did not impact the drinking water supplied by the Miller Road Treatment Facility.
Between approximately 6:00 am and 7:00 am yesterday (September 23, 2009), a release from Well PCX-1 occurred. The spill lasted a little over 40 minutes. The SRP reports that a valve at Well PCX-1 failed, leading to the spill of untreated water. It appears from photographs taken immediately after the incident, as well information from witnesses of the actual spill and the visual evidence regarding the slope of the surrounding terrain, that most of the spilled water flowed away from the canal and on to Miller Road. A small portion of the spill appears to have leaked into the Arizona Canal adjacent to the well. The spill contained up to 75 ug/l (micrograms per liter) of trichloroethelyene (TCE) and the volume of water spilled is estimated to be less than 20,000 gallons.
The Arizona Canal provides water to downstream water purveyors, including the cities of Tempe, Phoenix, Glendale, and Peoria. The closest downstream plant is the City of Tempe's Johnny G. Martinez Water Treatment Plant (JGMWTP), which is roughly 5 miles downstream. The next closest downstream plant is City of Phoenix 24th Street Plant, which is roughly 7 miles downstream.
We believe, and the preliminary data indicates, these water purveyors were not impacted by the release because of their distance from the PCX-1 location, the fact that the released water became mixed with water that was already in the canal thereby reducing the concentration of TCE, and the fact that TCE tends to dissipate rapidly. SRP notified both water purveyors immediately. At EPA's request, and as a precaution, the City of Tempe's JGMWTP and the City of Phoenix 24th Street Plant sampled for TCE to be sure the water meets the safe drinking water standard for TCE which is 5 ug/l. Expedited results from water samples taken in the Arizona Canal at a location about 50 feet downstream from PCX-1 well, at Chaparral Road, and at Camelback Road indicate no detectable concentration of TCE in the canal. Preliminary sampling results taken at the City of Tempe's plant also indicate no detections of TCE. We expect to receive results from the City of Phoenix plant in a day or so.
The SRP acted very quickly to:
1. Determine what and where the problem was;
2. Stop the spill by turning off the well;
3. Obtain samples of the spilled water on Miller Road, in the canal, and downstream of the release;
4. Vacuum the spilled water along Miller Road;
5. Sample the soil on the canal bank and Miller Road; and
6. Contact appropriate parties including EPA, ADEQ, the Cities of Phoenix and Tempe water utility districts, and the City of Scottsdale where the MRTF is located.
What happens next?
•The SRP is gathering additional information and will provide it along with sampling results to EPA in the next day or so.
•The Cities of Phoenix and Tempe will also provide sampling data for the 24th Street Plant and the JGMWTP.
•The SRP will provide a report on the incident within seven days.
•I will share the sampling data and incident report with all of you when I receive them.
I look forward to planning the upcoming annual meeting with you in the short term, and meeting you all in a few weeks. In the interim, please contact me at 415/972-3253 or by e-mail if you have any questions.
Regards,
Rachel
My work week has started, so I won't be able to follow up on this until next week at the earliest. For more information, please contact Ms. Loftin at the above number.
Later...
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Anybody have a good pic of the Sword of Damocles?
After last night's kangaroo court, Scottsdale needs a new logo. The old one (above) hasn't fit Scottsdale for years (witness the loss of horse property in Scottsdale over the last decade plus).
Maybe a nice drawing of someone sitting under the point of a sword...someone with curly hair and a mustache?...with someone else with a pair of scissors, reaching out to the single horsehair holding it up...someone also with a mustache, and with a shiny (perhaps sprayed-on?) tan...just musing out loud here.
:)
Scottsdale City Manager keeps his job - for another 3 months, anyway
Tuesday's meeting of the Scottsdale City Council began as most of them do, with a local group of kids (a Brownie troop this week) reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. In honor of Constitution Week, they announced that they would also recite the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution (You know, the one that starts "We the People...)
Which they did an awesome job with, except for the fact that they recited the beginning of the Declaration of Independence. (You know, the one that starts "When in the course of human events...)
Close, but... :)
That should have been the first clue that the original plan for the meeting (basically for the Council to fire City Manager John Little via a 4-3 vote) wasn't going to come off *quite* as planned, but would still be in the ballpark.
What was officially supposed to be a discussion of Little's job performance was more of a kangaroo court. It was made clear by a number of Council members that this evaluation was not about how well Little had met the goals and objectives of his job, because they had never laid out any for him to meet.
The tactics of his detractors on the Council (Borowsky, Mayor Lane, Littlefield, and Nelssen) consisted of harping on the things about Little that they didn't like (his "attitude" and conflicts with the Mayor, mostly). Council member Lisa Borowsky *did* mention that she thought Little is a good guy, before excoriating him for "not getting along" with the majority of the Council.
That was a pattern from the detractors - compliment him on his "charm" and then criticize him for his "insubordination."
There was also a tendency to allude to "other issues" without being specific (Borowsky referred to a rumor that not only was Little not "open" with the Mayor and Council, he wasn't "open" with other charter officers who were "open" with the Mayor and Council.)
That would have to refer to City Clerk Carolyn Jagger, who's pretty much the only charter officer left standing since Jim Lane took over the Mayor's job.
Tony Nelssen even accused Little of taking the City Manager's job just so he could list it on his resume.
In the end, though, it all came down to the contentious relationship between the City Manager and the Mayor.
They want to fire Little because he doesn't genuflect enthusiastically enough when the Mayor enters the room.
Nothing more tangible, or job performance-related, than that.
To be certain, Little had his supporters, too.
Council members Ecton, Klapp, and McCullagh made it clear that they thought Little has done well playing the hand he has been dealt and deserves to keep his job.
Ecton - "He has done an excellent job in a difficult time."
McCullagh - This is "not the easiest council to work with."
Klapp - "Six months is too short a period" to evaluate job performance.
Little also had strong support from the community and from rank-and-file City employees, including former Council member Robert Pettycrew and the Scottsdale Police Officers Association.
Most praised Little's honesty and "uncompromising integrity." Pettycrew, being a former member of the Council, brought some historical perspective to the mix, noting that there has been an "erosion" in the how the Council and City Staff relate to each other.
The end result of it all was a bit of a surprise - Council member Ron McCullagh moved to keep Little in his job and revisit the evaluation in six months. Nelssen said he could support a 90-day period, so McCullagh amended his motion to that time period.
Surprisingly, the amended motion passed by a 4-3 vote (Borowsky, Lane, Littlefield opposed - they want to fire Little immediately), giving Little a three-month reprieve.
So, after more than a couple of hours of contentious discussion, nothing was settled. Come back in December.
AZRepublic coverage here.
...A couple of observations on the events at the meeting.
- If Little has failed as City Manager, the most legitimate reason to fire him (and failure wasn't proven or even charged), then the Council has failed too. They hand-picked him to replace Jan Dolan and voted him in by a 7-0 vote.
- While the Mayor and members of the Council are intelligent and educated, they aren't very bright. There was some talk of Tuesday's story in the Republic about how the City has turned around a gaping budget deficit and now has a $6.6 million surplus, but they ignored the story of the investigation of the Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District by the national college accrediting organization. They're in trouble because of "micromanagement."
There's a lesson there for all at the meeting.
While the Scottsdale City Council doesn't have an accrediting agency to answer to, it does have voters to answer to, and will next year. It also has independent measures like the City's bond rating to help gauge the effectiveness of the City's day-to-day management, and the interference of the Mayor and City Council in the day-to-day affairs of the City does not bode well for the City's bond rating and other measures.
- Little was not the only target in Lane's sights during the meeting. Two of his supporters introduced petitions callng for the resignations of non-Lane clique Council members Klapp and McCullagh because the Scottsdale Chamber of Commerce's political activity last year.
Which they did an awesome job with, except for the fact that they recited the beginning of the Declaration of Independence. (You know, the one that starts "When in the course of human events...)
Close, but... :)
That should have been the first clue that the original plan for the meeting (basically for the Council to fire City Manager John Little via a 4-3 vote) wasn't going to come off *quite* as planned, but would still be in the ballpark.
What was officially supposed to be a discussion of Little's job performance was more of a kangaroo court. It was made clear by a number of Council members that this evaluation was not about how well Little had met the goals and objectives of his job, because they had never laid out any for him to meet.
The tactics of his detractors on the Council (Borowsky, Mayor Lane, Littlefield, and Nelssen) consisted of harping on the things about Little that they didn't like (his "attitude" and conflicts with the Mayor, mostly). Council member Lisa Borowsky *did* mention that she thought Little is a good guy, before excoriating him for "not getting along" with the majority of the Council.
That was a pattern from the detractors - compliment him on his "charm" and then criticize him for his "insubordination."
There was also a tendency to allude to "other issues" without being specific (Borowsky referred to a rumor that not only was Little not "open" with the Mayor and Council, he wasn't "open" with other charter officers who were "open" with the Mayor and Council.)
That would have to refer to City Clerk Carolyn Jagger, who's pretty much the only charter officer left standing since Jim Lane took over the Mayor's job.
Tony Nelssen even accused Little of taking the City Manager's job just so he could list it on his resume.
In the end, though, it all came down to the contentious relationship between the City Manager and the Mayor.
They want to fire Little because he doesn't genuflect enthusiastically enough when the Mayor enters the room.
Nothing more tangible, or job performance-related, than that.
To be certain, Little had his supporters, too.
Council members Ecton, Klapp, and McCullagh made it clear that they thought Little has done well playing the hand he has been dealt and deserves to keep his job.
Ecton - "He has done an excellent job in a difficult time."
McCullagh - This is "not the easiest council to work with."
Klapp - "Six months is too short a period" to evaluate job performance.
Little also had strong support from the community and from rank-and-file City employees, including former Council member Robert Pettycrew and the Scottsdale Police Officers Association.
Most praised Little's honesty and "uncompromising integrity." Pettycrew, being a former member of the Council, brought some historical perspective to the mix, noting that there has been an "erosion" in the how the Council and City Staff relate to each other.
The end result of it all was a bit of a surprise - Council member Ron McCullagh moved to keep Little in his job and revisit the evaluation in six months. Nelssen said he could support a 90-day period, so McCullagh amended his motion to that time period.
Surprisingly, the amended motion passed by a 4-3 vote (Borowsky, Lane, Littlefield opposed - they want to fire Little immediately), giving Little a three-month reprieve.
So, after more than a couple of hours of contentious discussion, nothing was settled. Come back in December.
AZRepublic coverage here.
...A couple of observations on the events at the meeting.
- If Little has failed as City Manager, the most legitimate reason to fire him (and failure wasn't proven or even charged), then the Council has failed too. They hand-picked him to replace Jan Dolan and voted him in by a 7-0 vote.
- While the Mayor and members of the Council are intelligent and educated, they aren't very bright. There was some talk of Tuesday's story in the Republic about how the City has turned around a gaping budget deficit and now has a $6.6 million surplus, but they ignored the story of the investigation of the Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District by the national college accrediting organization. They're in trouble because of "micromanagement."
There's a lesson there for all at the meeting.
While the Scottsdale City Council doesn't have an accrediting agency to answer to, it does have voters to answer to, and will next year. It also has independent measures like the City's bond rating to help gauge the effectiveness of the City's day-to-day management, and the interference of the Mayor and City Council in the day-to-day affairs of the City does not bode well for the City's bond rating and other measures.
- Little was not the only target in Lane's sights during the meeting. Two of his supporters introduced petitions callng for the resignations of non-Lane clique Council members Klapp and McCullagh because the Scottsdale Chamber of Commerce's political activity last year.
In case anyone who was at the meeting or watching it on TV thinks that I am exaggerating and that the two petitioners were just concerned citizens, know this -
One was Mike Fernandez, who was/is treasurer of the committee "Republicans for a Bright New Day in Scottsdale", a big player behind an anti-Mary Manross and Betty Drake ad blitz last year.
The other was R. Lamar Whitmer, who was Lane's campaign manager last year.
Even though it wasn't listed on the agenda as such, last night's meeting was *all* about Jim Lane's ongoing quest to consolidate his power and marginalize or remove any potential dissenters within the City's elected and senior staff power structures.
During the meeting, former Council member Pettycrew opined that Little should be kept on because "someone has to tell the emperor that he has no clothes."
That statement is more on point than one might think a usually trite aphorism could be -
It's looking more and more like Lane has a lot of tinhorn Napoleon in him.
- Lastly, in what could be a sign of things to come during the Lane administration, they couldn't appoint an interim City Attorney because all of the potential candidates for the job have withdrawn their names from consideration. Apparently word is getting out about Lane and the Council's penchant for using the City's professional staff as pin cushions when they don't parrot the Lane party line.
Later...
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Anyone want to guess what the main topic of this meeting will be?
I supposed this was inevitable given yesterday's arrest of County Supervisor Don Stapley.
What had been scheduled as a quiet week (i.e. - no meetings) for the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors now has a special meeting and executive session planned for tomorrow, Wednesday September 23 at 10 a.m.
Now, the special meeting has one item on the agenda - an application for a permit for a fireworks display in Queen Creek.
The executive session agenda doesn't specify a subject, but for some reason I expect that the latest development in Sheriff Joe Arpaio's holy war against the supes will at least rate a mention.
...In other "county level officials under investigation" news, the Arizona Republic has a story of how the organization that accredits colleges is investigating the Governing Board of the Maricopa Community College District for micromanagement.
That didn't sound too serious to me, but it turns out that would violate the rules governing maintenance of accreditation.
From the story -
The investigating team will be part of a public meeting with the Board at 4:30 today, and will attend the regular Board meeting at 6:30 tonight.
Unfortunately, I cannot attend those two meetings - tonight is the night that the Scottsdale City Council may fire yet another City Manager. The MCCCD Governing Board meeting has a high potential for being a boring set piece whose outcome is predetermined; the City Council meeting is probably going to be a train wreck.
As morbid as this sounds, train wrecks are far more interesting to write about than set pieces.
What had been scheduled as a quiet week (i.e. - no meetings) for the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors now has a special meeting and executive session planned for tomorrow, Wednesday September 23 at 10 a.m.
Now, the special meeting has one item on the agenda - an application for a permit for a fireworks display in Queen Creek.
The executive session agenda doesn't specify a subject, but for some reason I expect that the latest development in Sheriff Joe Arpaio's holy war against the supes will at least rate a mention.
...In other "county level officials under investigation" news, the Arizona Republic has a story of how the organization that accredits colleges is investigating the Governing Board of the Maricopa Community College District for micromanagement.
That didn't sound too serious to me, but it turns out that would violate the rules governing maintenance of accreditation.
From the story -
[College Chancellor] Glasper will then prepare a report on whether the district is violating parts of the Higher Learning Commission's accreditation policy. The commission could dismiss the complaint or recommend sanctions against Maricopa, which serves about 250,000 students at 10 colleges and two skill centers.Specifically, the violations could be rooted in the fact the governing board, any governing board in fact, is supposed to set policy while the College staff oversees day-to-day operations.
Ultimately, Maricopa Community Colleges could be placed on notice or on probation, or could lose accreditation.
The investigating team will be part of a public meeting with the Board at 4:30 today, and will attend the regular Board meeting at 6:30 tonight.
Unfortunately, I cannot attend those two meetings - tonight is the night that the Scottsdale City Council may fire yet another City Manager. The MCCCD Governing Board meeting has a high potential for being a boring set piece whose outcome is predetermined; the City Council meeting is probably going to be a train wreck.
As morbid as this sounds, train wrecks are far more interesting to write about than set pieces.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Arpaio still using MCSO to go after people he considers to be "enemies"
From the AZ Republic -
Also interesting is that this was a "probable cause" arrest, not one based on grand jury indictments.
I'm going to over-generalize a bit here, but aren't these the kind of crimes that generally merit a long, patient investigation capped off with grand jury indictments announced at a splashy press conference with the County Attorney and full color charts and somber pronouncements on the decline of the level of integrity of public officials and such?
By all accounts, the County Attorney's office had nothing to do with today's events or the "investigation" that led up to them. Even though the kind of crimes charged today don't usually fall into the bailiwick of a sheriff's office that by the very nature of its work spends more time and resources on street crime, not white collar crime.
This really reeks of arrogant grandstanding, or raw desperation, or both, on Arpaio's part.
Besides all that, it's sloppy police work.
It could endanger any possible legitimate case against Stapley or the other supes (Yes, I assume they are dirty in some way, if not this one). If this ever gets to a jury, the credibility of the MCSO and its investigation, or lack thereof, will undermine the prosecution's case.
I just wonder how much today's circus is going to cost Maricopa County's taxpayers.
Channel 15 coverage here; Phoenix New Times coverage here and here. Commentary by AZRepublic columnist EJ Montini here. EV Tribune coverage here. Commentary from the blog Mesa Issues here.
Maricopa County Sheriff's deputies arrested County Supervisor Don Stapley Monday morning on 93 new felony counts, which they say relate to campaign fraud, including using campaign funds to pay personal bills.Now, I'm not saying that I think that Stapley is innocent here, but the timing of this arrest is rather interesting, since it comes just a few days after Arpaio's first case against Stapley collapsed.
The Sheriff's Office said Monday afternoon all 93 felony allegations relate to fraudulent schemes involving Stapley's mortgage and loan businesses, campaign account fraud, tax return fraud and campaign fraud. The office alleges that Stapley used campaign money to pay personal bills and to pad his personal accounts. The supervisor is also accused of seven misdemeanors.
Also interesting is that this was a "probable cause" arrest, not one based on grand jury indictments.
I'm going to over-generalize a bit here, but aren't these the kind of crimes that generally merit a long, patient investigation capped off with grand jury indictments announced at a splashy press conference with the County Attorney and full color charts and somber pronouncements on the decline of the level of integrity of public officials and such?
By all accounts, the County Attorney's office had nothing to do with today's events or the "investigation" that led up to them. Even though the kind of crimes charged today don't usually fall into the bailiwick of a sheriff's office that by the very nature of its work spends more time and resources on street crime, not white collar crime.
This really reeks of arrogant grandstanding, or raw desperation, or both, on Arpaio's part.
Besides all that, it's sloppy police work.
It could endanger any possible legitimate case against Stapley or the other supes (Yes, I assume they are dirty in some way, if not this one). If this ever gets to a jury, the credibility of the MCSO and its investigation, or lack thereof, will undermine the prosecution's case.
I just wonder how much today's circus is going to cost Maricopa County's taxpayers.
Channel 15 coverage here; Phoenix New Times coverage here and here. Commentary by AZRepublic columnist EJ Montini here. EV Tribune coverage here. Commentary from the blog Mesa Issues here.
Today's meeting on STOs at the State Capitol
The Bipartisan Task Force on Private School Tuition Tax Credits (STO) Program met on Monday for nearly two hours.
They were beginning their research into the background of the STO program. While this meeting was open to the public, no public testimony was solicited today. That will happen at future meetings.
After opening with brief statements from the chair, Rep. David Schapira (D-LD17), and the other members present (Reps. Nancy Young-Wright (D), Rich Crandall (R), Tom Chabin (D), Cloves Campbell (D), and Chad Campbell (D) ).
They started with an overview of the history of the STO tax credits and program, presented by Mark Bogart, Senior Economist with the House Democratic staff. That presentation isn't available online, though its sources can all be found online. The compilation may be posted at a later time (I suggested doing so anyway.) I have the handout from the meeting. Where practicable and relevent, I'll link to the original source.
Later presenters included a representative from the Arizona Department of Revenue (ADOR).
Professor Larry Mohrweis, PhD, an Accounting professor from NAU and volunteer head of a northern AZ STO, spoke at length on the oversight issue. He wrote about it in 2002 and 2005 and was so prescient that Rep. Schapira called him the "Nostradamus of STOs." He doesn't seem to have an axe to grind and he knows his stuff (see list of sources of info below).
I won't try to recap their entire presentations here (when the video of the meeting is posted on the lege's website, you can watch them there).
EV Tribune coverage here.
There were a couple of things to take away from today's meeting -
- One of the biggest problems with the STO program, and this is an observation that cuts across partisan lines, is the lack of oversight and accountability. (The AZ Republic agrees. Witness this story in today's paper.) The closest thing to oversight and penalties for non-compliance that seems to exist is the fact that ADOR can disallow a credit taken by a taxpayer for a donation to a non-compliant STO. There's really nothing that ADOR can do to keep STOs in line. Unless they run afoul of 501c3 rules from the IRS, STOs can continue to siphon tax revenue away from the state and public education without any way to compel them to actually use the funds for the purpose originally intended by the writers of the original tax credit legislation.
- The meeting was informative, cordial, and utterly lacking in partisan posturing. It was unlike any other committee meeting that I've seen at the lege.
In other words, bipartisanship *is* possible.
Wonder if the Republican leadership and their rank-and-file members will remember that when it comes time to balance this year's budget and start working on next year's.
Some of the sources of their info can be found at:
AZ Department of Revenue's Corporate School Tax Credit Reports
ADOR's Private School Contributions and Fees
ADOR's Public School Contributions and Fees
ADOR's list of STOs, with caveats
ADOR's Private and Public School Tax Credit Information Publication
An August 2008 Issue Brief from the Arizona State Senate Research Staff, pertaining the school tax credits
Dr. Mohrweis' 2005 article from the trade journal AZCPA is here. His 2002 article, "Private School Tax Credits: What CPAs Should Know" doesn't seem to be available online. A 2000 piece, written for the Journal of Accountancy, is here.
Later...
They were beginning their research into the background of the STO program. While this meeting was open to the public, no public testimony was solicited today. That will happen at future meetings.
After opening with brief statements from the chair, Rep. David Schapira (D-LD17), and the other members present (Reps. Nancy Young-Wright (D), Rich Crandall (R), Tom Chabin (D), Cloves Campbell (D), and Chad Campbell (D) ).
They started with an overview of the history of the STO tax credits and program, presented by Mark Bogart, Senior Economist with the House Democratic staff. That presentation isn't available online, though its sources can all be found online. The compilation may be posted at a later time (I suggested doing so anyway.) I have the handout from the meeting. Where practicable and relevent, I'll link to the original source.
Later presenters included a representative from the Arizona Department of Revenue (ADOR).
Professor Larry Mohrweis, PhD, an Accounting professor from NAU and volunteer head of a northern AZ STO, spoke at length on the oversight issue. He wrote about it in 2002 and 2005 and was so prescient that Rep. Schapira called him the "Nostradamus of STOs." He doesn't seem to have an axe to grind and he knows his stuff (see list of sources of info below).
I won't try to recap their entire presentations here (when the video of the meeting is posted on the lege's website, you can watch them there).
EV Tribune coverage here.
There were a couple of things to take away from today's meeting -
- One of the biggest problems with the STO program, and this is an observation that cuts across partisan lines, is the lack of oversight and accountability. (The AZ Republic agrees. Witness this story in today's paper.) The closest thing to oversight and penalties for non-compliance that seems to exist is the fact that ADOR can disallow a credit taken by a taxpayer for a donation to a non-compliant STO. There's really nothing that ADOR can do to keep STOs in line. Unless they run afoul of 501c3 rules from the IRS, STOs can continue to siphon tax revenue away from the state and public education without any way to compel them to actually use the funds for the purpose originally intended by the writers of the original tax credit legislation.
- The meeting was informative, cordial, and utterly lacking in partisan posturing. It was unlike any other committee meeting that I've seen at the lege.
In other words, bipartisanship *is* possible.
Wonder if the Republican leadership and their rank-and-file members will remember that when it comes time to balance this year's budget and start working on next year's.
Some of the sources of their info can be found at:
AZ Department of Revenue's Corporate School Tax Credit Reports
ADOR's Private School Contributions and Fees
ADOR's Public School Contributions and Fees
ADOR's list of STOs, with caveats
ADOR's Private and Public School Tax Credit Information Publication
An August 2008 Issue Brief from the Arizona State Senate Research Staff, pertaining the school tax credits
Dr. Mohrweis' 2005 article from the trade journal AZCPA is here. His 2002 article, "Private School Tax Credits: What CPAs Should Know" doesn't seem to be available online. A 2000 piece, written for the Journal of Accountancy, is here.
Later...
STO Task Force to start meeting in a few minutes
In HHR3. The webcast should be available on the lege website, or you might be able to find in on Cox Cable channel 123, AZ Capitol TV.
No live blogging today. I'm at the meeting, but will be trying to pay attention to all of it.
Later...
No live blogging today. I'm at the meeting, but will be trying to pay attention to all of it.
Later...
Sunday, September 20, 2009
The coming week...
As usual, all info gathered from the websites of the relevent political bodies/agencies (except where noted) and subject to change without notice.
...Over in the U.S. House of Representatives, they have Monday off (except for a pro forma session at 4 p.m. EDT), The agenda for the rest of the week includes -
- H.R. 3548, Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2009, heard under suspension of the rules (2/3 majority required for passage);
- As-yet-unnumbered, "To provide for an additional temporary extension of programs under the Small Business Act and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958" under suspension of the rules;
- As-yet-unnumbered, "Fiscal Year 2010 Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act" under suspension of the rules;
- As-yet-unnumbered, "Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2009" under suspension of the rules;
- H.R. 324, "Santa Cruz Valley National Heritage Area Act". This one is a bill sponsored by AZ's Raul Grijalva (D-CD7) that was heard under suspension of the rules a couple of weeks ago. It gained majority support at that time, but enough Republicans voted against it that it didn't gain the 2/3 support to pass under suspension. This time it will be heard "under a rule," meaning that a simple majority will be required for passage.
- As-yet-unnumbered, "Making Continuing Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2010, and for other purposes." Heard under a rule.
Yippee, a budget CR. Apparently the Democratic leadership in Congress hasn't learned any lessons from 8 years of Republican mismanagement. Just pass a budget already.
...Over in the Senate, they'll continue consideration of Interior appropriations (aka - the budget). On Tuesday, the Senate Finance Committee will consider Max Baucus' health insurer lobbyist-written "reform" of health insurance in the U.S.
In other committee business, on Tuesday, a subcommittee of Senate Judiciary will hold a hearing on "Comprehensive Immigration Reform: How the Current Immigration Law Negatively Impacts America's Agricultural Industry and Food Security." Nativists should bring their own bedsheets and crosses (Reminder: Senate galleries are a "no burn" zone, so you folks should keep your kerosene in your trailers.)
Full list of committee hearings here.
...The Arizona Legislature still hasn't balanced the budget and still isn't in session, but there *is* some activity at the Capitol this week.
- On Monday at 10 a.m., the Bipartisan Task Force on the Private School Tuition Tax Credits program will hold its first meeting in HHR3.
- The Joint Legislative Budget Committee is meeting on Tuesday at 2:30 p.m. in HHR4. Agenda here.
- The Joint Committee on Capital Review is meeting on Tuesday at 1 p.m. in SHR109. Agenda here.
...The Arizona Corporation Commission will hold regularly scheduled open meetings on Tuesday and Wednesday. The agenda is here. The highlight looks to be item #20, "Application for a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility (CEC) for the Vail to Valencia 115 kV to138 kV Transmission Line Upgrade Project..."
Complete hearing schedule here.
...The Arizona Board of Regents will be meeting on Thursday and Friday at NAU. Agenda here. Executive session agenda here. That one includes discussion of a project to privatize some University housing at NAU. Committee and other meeting schedule here.
...The Board of Directors of the Maricopa Integrated Health System have two meetings scheduled this week. On Monday, they'll hold a Special meeting at noon. The agenda is vague at this point, with what looks to be a motion to recess into executive session and a legislative report later.
On Wednesday at 1 p.m., they'll meet in a regularly scheduled open meeting. Agenda here.
...On Tuesday, the Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District will meet. An executive session is scheduled for 5:30 p.m. and a regular meeting is scheduled for 6:30. Agenda here. The agenda looks to be pretty non-controversial thus far, but there may be some fireworks over the revelation earlier this month that Board President Colleen Clark was arrested for DUI earlier this summer.
...The Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project will be holding a "strategic planning retreat" in Tucson on Thursday. The schedule of events includes a meeting of the Strategic Plan Task Force to discuss the strategic planning retreat process.
...The Scottsdale City Council has a meeting scheduled for Tuesday. Items include aanother shot across the bow discussion of the job performance of the City Manager and the possible appointment of an interim City Attorney, Clifford Mattice. Mayor Jim Lane originally wanted to give the interim appointment to one William Sims, but a majority of the Council balked at having only one candidate to consider (August 25, 2009)
Not scheduled to meet this week: Citizens Clean Elections Commission, Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (though a short-notice Executive Session wouldn't exactly be unheard-of with this bunch) and the Tempe City Council.
Later...
...Over in the U.S. House of Representatives, they have Monday off (except for a pro forma session at 4 p.m. EDT), The agenda for the rest of the week includes -
- H.R. 3548, Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2009, heard under suspension of the rules (2/3 majority required for passage);
- As-yet-unnumbered, "To provide for an additional temporary extension of programs under the Small Business Act and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958" under suspension of the rules;
- As-yet-unnumbered, "Fiscal Year 2010 Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act" under suspension of the rules;
- As-yet-unnumbered, "Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2009" under suspension of the rules;
- H.R. 324, "Santa Cruz Valley National Heritage Area Act". This one is a bill sponsored by AZ's Raul Grijalva (D-CD7) that was heard under suspension of the rules a couple of weeks ago. It gained majority support at that time, but enough Republicans voted against it that it didn't gain the 2/3 support to pass under suspension. This time it will be heard "under a rule," meaning that a simple majority will be required for passage.
- As-yet-unnumbered, "Making Continuing Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2010, and for other purposes." Heard under a rule.
Yippee, a budget CR. Apparently the Democratic leadership in Congress hasn't learned any lessons from 8 years of Republican mismanagement. Just pass a budget already.
...Over in the Senate, they'll continue consideration of Interior appropriations (aka - the budget). On Tuesday, the Senate Finance Committee will consider Max Baucus' health insurer lobbyist-written "reform" of health insurance in the U.S.
In other committee business, on Tuesday, a subcommittee of Senate Judiciary will hold a hearing on "Comprehensive Immigration Reform: How the Current Immigration Law Negatively Impacts America's Agricultural Industry and Food Security." Nativists should bring their own bedsheets and crosses (Reminder: Senate galleries are a "no burn" zone, so you folks should keep your kerosene in your trailers.)
Full list of committee hearings here.
...The Arizona Legislature still hasn't balanced the budget and still isn't in session, but there *is* some activity at the Capitol this week.
- On Monday at 10 a.m., the Bipartisan Task Force on the Private School Tuition Tax Credits program will hold its first meeting in HHR3.
- The Joint Legislative Budget Committee is meeting on Tuesday at 2:30 p.m. in HHR4. Agenda here.
- The Joint Committee on Capital Review is meeting on Tuesday at 1 p.m. in SHR109. Agenda here.
...The Arizona Corporation Commission will hold regularly scheduled open meetings on Tuesday and Wednesday. The agenda is here. The highlight looks to be item #20, "Application for a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility (CEC) for the Vail to Valencia 115 kV to138 kV Transmission Line Upgrade Project..."
Complete hearing schedule here.
...The Arizona Board of Regents will be meeting on Thursday and Friday at NAU. Agenda here. Executive session agenda here. That one includes discussion of a project to privatize some University housing at NAU. Committee and other meeting schedule here.
...The Board of Directors of the Maricopa Integrated Health System have two meetings scheduled this week. On Monday, they'll hold a Special meeting at noon. The agenda is vague at this point, with what looks to be a motion to recess into executive session and a legislative report later.
On Wednesday at 1 p.m., they'll meet in a regularly scheduled open meeting. Agenda here.
...On Tuesday, the Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District will meet. An executive session is scheduled for 5:30 p.m. and a regular meeting is scheduled for 6:30. Agenda here. The agenda looks to be pretty non-controversial thus far, but there may be some fireworks over the revelation earlier this month that Board President Colleen Clark was arrested for DUI earlier this summer.
...The Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project will be holding a "strategic planning retreat" in Tucson on Thursday. The schedule of events includes a meeting of the Strategic Plan Task Force to discuss the strategic planning retreat process.
...The Scottsdale City Council has a meeting scheduled for Tuesday. Items include a
Not scheduled to meet this week: Citizens Clean Elections Commission, Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (though a short-notice Executive Session wouldn't exactly be unheard-of with this bunch) and the Tempe City Council.
Later...
Saturday, September 19, 2009
What it says/what it should say
The City of Scottsdale has posted its City Attorney opening on its jobs website.
As a courtesy to prospective job seekers (of the lawyer genus), I'm going to translate the job notice from "HR staff-written official-ese" into plain English.
Here goes...
What it says -
Candidates for the City Attorney's position should, you know, be *attorneys.* Experience is good. The successful candidate should be prepared to spend a significant part of his/her salary on maintaining a Scottsdale residence, if only for appearance's sake.
What it says -
Duhhhh! The City Attorney is responsible for doing lawyer stuff. The City Attorney's job security is subject to the whim of the City Council and Mayor, so be prepared to pucker. And if you want good performance reviews, practice feigning enthusiasm while you pucker.
What it says -
This office is an exercise in "solid biological waste matter rolls downhill." The Mayor and City Council will roll it onto you, and the successful candidate will have 57 direct reports to roll it on to in turn.
What it says -
The successful candidate will tell the Mayor and City Council what they want to hear, until the Council changes its mind, probably via a 4-3 vote.
The successful candidate should expect to be looking for a new job shortly after the next election and installation of new Council members in January, 2011.
In the event that this posting hasn't been enough to pique your interest, please peruse our nifty four-color brochure. Maybe it will stun you into submission with its Chamber of Commerce imagery and prose.
Or maybe not.
The bottom line is that this Council ran off the previous City Attorney much as her predecessor was run off. In addition, they're butting heads with the current City Manager after running off his predecessor.
Somebody *will* take the position, but they should do so with their eyes open. They'll be going to work for a bunch of people whose report cards in school all read "does not play well with others."
As a courtesy to prospective job seekers (of the lawyer genus), I'm going to translate the job notice from "HR staff-written official-ese" into plain English.
Here goes...
What it says -
Compensation is highly competitive and dependent upon qualifications. Candidate must be a graduate of a school of law accredited by the American Bar Association, a current member of the Arizona State Bar and have eight years of progressively responsible legal and management experience in a complex organization. Candidate must reside within the City of Scottsdale at time of hire.What it should say -
Candidates for the City Attorney's position should, you know, be *attorneys.* Experience is good. The successful candidate should be prepared to spend a significant part of his/her salary on maintaining a Scottsdale residence, if only for appearance's sake.
What it says -
The City Attorney manages legal issues and the delivery of legal services, oversees the Civil, Prosecution and Victim Services Divisions, and serves as the chief legal advisor to the Mayor, City Council and City Manager. The City Attorney is appointed by a majority vote of the City Council, and serves at the pleasure of the City Council.What it should say -
Duhhhh! The City Attorney is responsible for doing lawyer stuff. The City Attorney's job security is subject to the whim of the City Council and Mayor, so be prepared to pucker. And if you want good performance reviews, practice feigning enthusiasm while you pucker.
What it says -
The mission of the City Attorney’s Office is to provide legal and advocacy services that assist the organization to enhance the quality of life within Scottsdale and build trust in the integrity of City government. The City Attorney leads a team of 57 full-time employees and has a current year operating budget of $6,384,959. For more information, please visit the following website: http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/departments/City_Attorney.What it should say -
This office is an exercise in "solid biological waste matter rolls downhill." The Mayor and City Council will roll it onto you, and the successful candidate will have 57 direct reports to roll it on to in turn.
What it says -
Goals for the new City Attorney will be to represent the City of Scottsdale in civil, administrative and other court proceedings in defense and support of the mission and broad goals of the City Council. Provide legal advice to City officials and employees in support of their efforts to achieve the mission and broad goals of the City Council. Continue to expand and improve customer services, legal representation and exchange of information through increased use of technology.What is should say -
Please see the attached brochure for additional information.
The successful candidate will tell the Mayor and City Council what they want to hear, until the Council changes its mind, probably via a 4-3 vote.
The successful candidate should expect to be looking for a new job shortly after the next election and installation of new Council members in January, 2011.
In the event that this posting hasn't been enough to pique your interest, please peruse our nifty four-color brochure. Maybe it will stun you into submission with its Chamber of Commerce imagery and prose.
Or maybe not.
The bottom line is that this Council ran off the previous City Attorney much as her predecessor was run off. In addition, they're butting heads with the current City Manager after running off his predecessor.
Somebody *will* take the position, but they should do so with their eyes open. They'll be going to work for a bunch of people whose report cards in school all read "does not play well with others."
Friday, September 18, 2009
More 2010 campaign committees forming...
At this point, I won't bother trying to cover all candidate committees, just the ones affecting statewide races and those local to me (LD17, and LDs 8 and 18).
Oh, and any others that are interesting to me in some way. Call it "blogger's privilege" or something.
For those who are interested in races other than the ones mentioned here, the AZ Secretary of State's committee search page is here.
On to the substance of the post...
...In the big news, Felecia Rotellini, formerly Arizona Superintendent of Financial Institutions, formed a committee for her candidacy for the Democratic nomination for Attorney General (filer ID 201000232). Phoenix New Times coverage here. As the linked article points out, she a former prosecutor with some serious cred in that sphere.
And if that wasn't enough to get the attention of State Rep. David Lujan, heretofore the only Democratic candidate in the race, her campaign's chair is Sam Coppersmith, former Congressman and long-time player in Democratic circles. He's also an intermittent blogger.
...In LD8 (north Scottsdale/Fountain Hills), one Dennis Robbins has formed a committee to run for the Republican nomination for State Representative. He also has an interesting name (in Scottsdale, anyway) as chair - Paul Messinger. "Messinger Mortuaries" ring a bell anyone? Messinger was also chair of Jim Lane's mayoral committee last year.
As near as I can tell, this Dennis Robbins is a lawyer, though it is such a common name that a Google search generates a LOT of results.
His committee is the fourth formed for the Rep nomination in LD8 thus far, and neither of the incumbents (Michelle Reagan and John Kavanagh) has yet formed a committee. Reagan has an exploratory committee open that doesn't list an office sought, but it is widely expected that she will announce for the LD8 State Senate seat currently held by Carolyn Allen. Allen is termed out after this session of the lege (I think.)
Another strong rumor is that Kavanagh is also eyeing that Senate seat, possibly setting up a donnybrook primary for the Republicans.
Reagan has money, family influence among LD8 Republicans (her mom is a former chair and her dad is an elected JP), and the right last name, by Republican standards anyway. She is an ardent conservative and member of the Chamber of Commerce wing of the AZGOP. She will occasionally work for the best interests of her district and the state.
Kavanagh has the nativists in the district and the support of the Arpaio/Pearce wing of the AZGOP. 'Nuff said there.
Even if they don't face off next year, they will within the next few cycles, either for LD8 State Senate or for the Congressional seat, whatever district they're in after redistricting.
Right now, give the edge to Reagan in a head-to-head matchup. North Scottsdale is bigger than Fountain Hills.
...In LD17 (home!) one Augustus Shaw IV has formed a $500 threshold committee for a run at State Representative. No party is listed, but Shaw is the 1st Vice Chair of the Arizona Republican Party. He's probably not running as an independent. By profession, he's an attorney for HOAs when they sue their homeowners. He's also somewhat colorful.
He is also a "founding member" of the Coalition of Arizona African American Republicans. The address the Coalition lists with the AZSOS is that of Shaw's law office.
Before I looked into his background, I saw the "$500 Threshold" and no party affiliation, and didn't take the candidacy seriously.
That has changed.
Oh, and any others that are interesting to me in some way. Call it "blogger's privilege" or something.
For those who are interested in races other than the ones mentioned here, the AZ Secretary of State's committee search page is here.
On to the substance of the post...
...In the big news, Felecia Rotellini, formerly Arizona Superintendent of Financial Institutions, formed a committee for her candidacy for the Democratic nomination for Attorney General (filer ID 201000232). Phoenix New Times coverage here. As the linked article points out, she a former prosecutor with some serious cred in that sphere.
And if that wasn't enough to get the attention of State Rep. David Lujan, heretofore the only Democratic candidate in the race, her campaign's chair is Sam Coppersmith, former Congressman and long-time player in Democratic circles. He's also an intermittent blogger.
...In LD8 (north Scottsdale/Fountain Hills), one Dennis Robbins has formed a committee to run for the Republican nomination for State Representative. He also has an interesting name (in Scottsdale, anyway) as chair - Paul Messinger. "Messinger Mortuaries" ring a bell anyone? Messinger was also chair of Jim Lane's mayoral committee last year.
As near as I can tell, this Dennis Robbins is a lawyer, though it is such a common name that a Google search generates a LOT of results.
His committee is the fourth formed for the Rep nomination in LD8 thus far, and neither of the incumbents (Michelle Reagan and John Kavanagh) has yet formed a committee. Reagan has an exploratory committee open that doesn't list an office sought, but it is widely expected that she will announce for the LD8 State Senate seat currently held by Carolyn Allen. Allen is termed out after this session of the lege (I think.)
Another strong rumor is that Kavanagh is also eyeing that Senate seat, possibly setting up a donnybrook primary for the Republicans.
Reagan has money, family influence among LD8 Republicans (her mom is a former chair and her dad is an elected JP), and the right last name, by Republican standards anyway. She is an ardent conservative and member of the Chamber of Commerce wing of the AZGOP. She will occasionally work for the best interests of her district and the state.
Kavanagh has the nativists in the district and the support of the Arpaio/Pearce wing of the AZGOP. 'Nuff said there.
Even if they don't face off next year, they will within the next few cycles, either for LD8 State Senate or for the Congressional seat, whatever district they're in after redistricting.
Right now, give the edge to Reagan in a head-to-head matchup. North Scottsdale is bigger than Fountain Hills.
...In LD17 (home!) one Augustus Shaw IV has formed a $500 threshold committee for a run at State Representative. No party is listed, but Shaw is the 1st Vice Chair of the Arizona Republican Party. He's probably not running as an independent. By profession, he's an attorney for HOAs when they sue their homeowners. He's also somewhat colorful.
He is also a "founding member" of the Coalition of Arizona African American Republicans. The address the Coalition lists with the AZSOS is that of Shaw's law office.
Before I looked into his background, I saw the "$500 Threshold" and no party affiliation, and didn't take the candidacy seriously.
That has changed.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Republican leadership going after D17 Rep. Schapira
Apparently, the Republican leadership in the House objects to the work that Rep. David Schapira (D-LD17) has been doing while the lege isn't in session.
Or maybe they just object to looking lazy by comparison.
First, Republican Speaker Kirk Adams announced the formation of his own committee to look into the state's tuition tax credit program and school tuition organizations. The program is rife with abuses, as highlighted by the East Valley Tribune's award-winning "Rigged Privilege" investigative series.
Then later in the day, House Appropriations chair John Kavanagh (R-Fountain Hills) went on JD Hayworth's talk show on KFYI and spent an entire hour bashing Rep. Schapira for talking to an international group of educators yesterday. (No link yet, will provide if one becomes available.)
An entire hour.
Yep, they're officially worried about David. Welcome to the big leagues, Representative Schapira.
Well, on the first item, Adams' committee, as one Capitol observer put it, "it's about time that Adams showed some leadership on this."
As I put it, "it isn't leadership if you're following, not leading."
Schapira and the Democrats were on the burgeoning scandal of STO abuse weeks ago (and David Safier at Blog for Arizona and Jen at Mindless Mumblings of a Martyr Mom were on this months ago); Adams is just trying to steal some thunder and maybe get in the way of any real work.
That's not leadership.
Oh yeah, and neither is stacking the committee membership in such a way as to ensure that they won't find much, if anything, wrong with the tuition tax credit program.
From the EV Trib piece on today's announcement -
Let's see -
All of them are members of the House Ways and Means Committee. Not a single one is a member of the Education Committee. An interesting omission for a panel looking at an education-related matter.
There are two Democrats on Adams' panel. However, Rep. Jack Brown, the longest-serving member of the lege and highly respected for his knowledge and wisdom, is also the most conservative Democrat in the House. He won't have any interest in making waves on this panel.
Of course, that is presuming that Brown can even attend to the committee's work. The three Republicans on the panel are all Maricopa County residents and are mere minutes away from the Capitol; the two Democrats live 150 miles (Chabin) and 170 miles (Brown) away. Guess which members will be able to be more involved in the committee?
As for the second item, the relentless bashing by Kavanagh and Hayworth?
Ummm...well, to be rather blunt, these aren't two guys noted for their profound insights on education systems, American or international.
On the other hand, they are known for having insights into who might become a future electoral opponent. And for signalling that insight by issuing a pre-emptive attack.
Later...
Or maybe they just object to looking lazy by comparison.
First, Republican Speaker Kirk Adams announced the formation of his own committee to look into the state's tuition tax credit program and school tuition organizations. The program is rife with abuses, as highlighted by the East Valley Tribune's award-winning "Rigged Privilege" investigative series.
Then later in the day, House Appropriations chair John Kavanagh (R-Fountain Hills) went on JD Hayworth's talk show on KFYI and spent an entire hour bashing Rep. Schapira for talking to an international group of educators yesterday. (No link yet, will provide if one becomes available.)
An entire hour.
Yep, they're officially worried about David. Welcome to the big leagues, Representative Schapira.
Well, on the first item, Adams' committee, as one Capitol observer put it, "it's about time that Adams showed some leadership on this."
As I put it, "it isn't leadership if you're following, not leading."
Schapira and the Democrats were on the burgeoning scandal of STO abuse weeks ago (and David Safier at Blog for Arizona and Jen at Mindless Mumblings of a Martyr Mom were on this months ago); Adams is just trying to steal some thunder and maybe get in the way of any real work.
That's not leadership.
Oh yeah, and neither is stacking the committee membership in such a way as to ensure that they won't find much, if anything, wrong with the tuition tax credit program.
From the EV Trib piece on today's announcement -
Adams has assigned Rep. Rick Murphy, R-Glendale, as chairman of the committee. Other members include: Andy Biggs, R-Gilbert; Debbie Lesko, R-Glendale; Jack Brown, D-St. Johns; and Tom Chabin, D-Flagstaff.What's wrong with that list?
Let's see -
All of them are members of the House Ways and Means Committee. Not a single one is a member of the Education Committee. An interesting omission for a panel looking at an education-related matter.
There are two Democrats on Adams' panel. However, Rep. Jack Brown, the longest-serving member of the lege and highly respected for his knowledge and wisdom, is also the most conservative Democrat in the House. He won't have any interest in making waves on this panel.
Of course, that is presuming that Brown can even attend to the committee's work. The three Republicans on the panel are all Maricopa County residents and are mere minutes away from the Capitol; the two Democrats live 150 miles (Chabin) and 170 miles (Brown) away. Guess which members will be able to be more involved in the committee?
As for the second item, the relentless bashing by Kavanagh and Hayworth?
Ummm...well, to be rather blunt, these aren't two guys noted for their profound insights on education systems, American or international.
On the other hand, they are known for having insights into who might become a future electoral opponent. And for signalling that insight by issuing a pre-emptive attack.
Later...
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Schapira working for education in Arizona
Even though the state legislature isn't in session, State Rep. David Schapira (D-Tempe) is still working diligently for his constituents and all Arizonans.
On Wednesday, he met with an international group of educators at the House to discuss topics in early childhood education, including trends in U.S. policies and research as well as common challenges.
Next Monday, he will be chairing the first meeting of the Bipartisan Task Force on the Private School Tuition Tax Credits. (10 a.m., HHR3, House of Representatives building at the State Capitol)
The Task Force was established to look into questions and possible legal violations related to the STO program, many of which were brought to the fore by investigating reporting from the East Valley Tribune and the Arizona Republic.
Monday's meeting will feature experts on STOs while future meetings will offer the public the opportunity to provide their input.
David Safier at Blog for Arizona has an update on the latest developments relating to charter schools and STOs here.
On Wednesday, he met with an international group of educators at the House to discuss topics in early childhood education, including trends in U.S. policies and research as well as common challenges.
Next Monday, he will be chairing the first meeting of the Bipartisan Task Force on the Private School Tuition Tax Credits. (10 a.m., HHR3, House of Representatives building at the State Capitol)
The Task Force was established to look into questions and possible legal violations related to the STO program, many of which were brought to the fore by investigating reporting from the East Valley Tribune and the Arizona Republic.
Monday's meeting will feature experts on STOs while future meetings will offer the public the opportunity to provide their input.
David Safier at Blog for Arizona has an update on the latest developments relating to charter schools and STOs here.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
The U.S. House admonishes Rep. Joe Wilson (R-Sons of Confederate Veterans)
By a vote of 240 - 179, with 5 present and 10 members not voting, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to "disapprove" of Rep. Joe Wilson's behavior during President Obama's speech to a joint session of Congress last week. Reuters coverage here.
In case you have a really short memory, Wilson is the South Carolina Republican who shouted "you lie!" at the President during the speech.
The vote was almost totally along party lines, with only 12 Democrats crossing over to vote against the resolution disapproving of Wilson's breach of House decorum and only 7 Republicans voting to support the resolution.
In a curious twist, 2 of the 19 crossovers came from AZ - Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ8) voted against, and Jeff Flake (R-AZ6) voted for it.
From Giffords' statement on the vote -
Even though Bush wasn't speaking when the criticisms were issued.
Even though there is a big difference between saying "No!" (in response to President Bush's call to "reform" (aka "privatize") Social Security and screaming "You lie!"
Even though none of the Democratic "transgressions" that he cited ever inspired a similar rebuke, despite the fact that they occurred during a period when Shadegg's Republicans controlled the House. If any Democrats had even *looked* over the line between decorous and indecorous behavior, the punishments would have been swift and much harsher than mere "disapproval."
For what it's worth, if I was a member of the House, like Congresswoman Giffords, I'd have voted against the resolution.
Not because I'm a nice guy or a budding statesman (I'm not) and not because I support Wilson's behavior (he's a bigoted thug who should do the world a favor and slither back under whatever rock he was hatched under).
Nope, I'd have voted against the measure so that I could be as uncivil toward Wilson and his ilk as they are toward President Obama and the Democrats.
Toldja I'm not a nice guy. :)
Of course, that thinking probably isn't unique to me, and probably contributed to the passage of the resolution. Most Democratic members of the House are far more mature than I am, and realize what kind of damage that attitude would do to the remaining civility in the House.
However, if such a situation were to come to pass (you know, me in the House voting against a similar resolution), I can promise one thing.
Whenever I called someone a liar (or corrupt, or bigoted, or whatever), I'd have evidence with me and wouldn't, you know, lie when calling someone else a liar. Like Joe Wilson did. See section 246 of H.R. 3200.
Relevant phrase - "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States."
Tedski's take at R-Cubed here;
Later...
In case you have a really short memory, Wilson is the South Carolina Republican who shouted "you lie!" at the President during the speech.
The vote was almost totally along party lines, with only 12 Democrats crossing over to vote against the resolution disapproving of Wilson's breach of House decorum and only 7 Republicans voting to support the resolution.
In a curious twist, 2 of the 19 crossovers came from AZ - Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ8) voted against, and Jeff Flake (R-AZ6) voted for it.
From Giffords' statement on the vote -
It is unfortunate that Congressman Wilson has not apologized to our colleagues for his rude outburst. He should. Heckling the President of the United States while he is addressing a joint session of Congress is totally unacceptable for a member of this body. The American people know this and Congressman Wilson knows this – that is why he apologized to President Obama. We should not waste any more time on this matter. We need to stay focused on health insurance reform and improving our economy.From Flake's statement on the vote -
Congressman Wilson is a good man, and I have confidence that his apology to President Obama was sincere,” said Flake. “However, his actions violated the rules of decorum of the House of Representatives.John Shadegg (R-Big Insurance) also has a statement out there, but it's a little less statesman-like than the other two ("stateswoman-like" in Giffords' case) - he blames the Democrats for the outburst, conflating Wilson's direct and personal insult of the President in the House chamber (interrupting and heckling President Obama) with Democratic criticisms of then-President Bush.
While the tenor of political debate seems to get more disrespectful every year, the floor of the House of Representatives has always provided a welcome respite. Even the fiercest political opponents refer to each other as ‘gentleman’ and afford one another civility and respect. We need to uphold that tradition.
Despite my suspicion that this resolution was driven as much by partisan politics as upholding precedent, I believe that it’s important to maintain the rules of decorum in the House and I supported its passage.
Even though Bush wasn't speaking when the criticisms were issued.
Even though there is a big difference between saying "No!" (in response to President Bush's call to "reform" (aka "privatize") Social Security and screaming "You lie!"
Even though none of the Democratic "transgressions" that he cited ever inspired a similar rebuke, despite the fact that they occurred during a period when Shadegg's Republicans controlled the House. If any Democrats had even *looked* over the line between decorous and indecorous behavior, the punishments would have been swift and much harsher than mere "disapproval."
For what it's worth, if I was a member of the House, like Congresswoman Giffords, I'd have voted against the resolution.
Not because I'm a nice guy or a budding statesman (I'm not) and not because I support Wilson's behavior (he's a bigoted thug who should do the world a favor and slither back under whatever rock he was hatched under).
Nope, I'd have voted against the measure so that I could be as uncivil toward Wilson and his ilk as they are toward President Obama and the Democrats.
Toldja I'm not a nice guy. :)
Of course, that thinking probably isn't unique to me, and probably contributed to the passage of the resolution. Most Democratic members of the House are far more mature than I am, and realize what kind of damage that attitude would do to the remaining civility in the House.
However, if such a situation were to come to pass (you know, me in the House voting against a similar resolution), I can promise one thing.
Whenever I called someone a liar (or corrupt, or bigoted, or whatever), I'd have evidence with me and wouldn't, you know, lie when calling someone else a liar. Like Joe Wilson did. See section 246 of H.R. 3200.
Relevant phrase - "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States."
Tedski's take at R-Cubed here;
Later...
DiCiccio: Operating straight outta Campaign Damage Control 101
One of the first things any candidates learn is that when you don't get an important endorsement, the next best thing is to pretend you didn't even want that endorsement.
Even better, insinuate (or, as in this case, state almost outrightly) that you are morally superior to the people who endorsed your opponent.
To whit, from today's Arizona Republic -
Today's denouncement of the Arizona Police Association's endorsement of Dana Kennedy for the District 6 seat on the Phoenix City Council does indicate one thing - DiCiccio understands that no matter how well he did in the primary (48% of the vote), he doesn't get to bring those votes with him into November.
Right now, he and Dana Kennedy are the only two candidates left for voters to compare and select from. He won't be able to hide behind a gaggle of other candidates and rely on name recognition (he's a former and current appointed member of the Phoenix City Council) to carry the day.
He'll have to beat Dana Kennedy on his own merits, and he's worried.
As he should be.
Even better, insinuate (or, as in this case, state almost outrightly) that you are morally superior to the people who endorsed your opponent.
To whit, from today's Arizona Republic -
Phoenix City Councilman Sal DiCiccio said a coalition of Arizona police unions tried to cut a deal with him over the weekend: withdraw his support for Police Chief Jack Harris in exchange for an endorsement from the Arizona Police Association.The simple fact is that DiCiccio has been clashing with the Phoenix police for months, even years - DiCiccio has jumped on the Joe Arpaio/Andy Thomas nativist gravy train while the Phoenix PD, including their unions, have taken a more professional approach. They understand that there are laws in this country (and in Phoenix) that are just as important (or, dare I say it, *more* important) as the immigration-related ones.
When the District 6 councilman rejected the offer, he said, the association on Monday instead endorsed his challenger in the Nov. 3 run-off election, Dana Marie Kennedy.
Today's denouncement of the Arizona Police Association's endorsement of Dana Kennedy for the District 6 seat on the Phoenix City Council does indicate one thing - DiCiccio understands that no matter how well he did in the primary (48% of the vote), he doesn't get to bring those votes with him into November.
Right now, he and Dana Kennedy are the only two candidates left for voters to compare and select from. He won't be able to hide behind a gaggle of other candidates and rely on name recognition (he's a former and current appointed member of the Phoenix City Council) to carry the day.
He'll have to beat Dana Kennedy on his own merits, and he's worried.
As he should be.
Monday, September 14, 2009
"Waaaahhhhhh"*
*I was going to title this post "Republican newbies in the Arizona Senate cry about receiving criticism" but decided that was too long.
I think that the new title adequately sums it up, though. :)
As previously observed by Tedski at Rum, Romanism, Rebellion and Donna at Democratic Diva, three Republican state senators - Sylvia Allen (LD5), Steve Pierce (LD1) and Al Melvin (LD26) - had an op/ed piece published in the AZ Republic.
In it, they blamed the state's budget woes on the Democrats and, I think, a reporter (Mary Jo Pitzl) who wrote a couple of pieces that they don't approve of.
OK, they just thought her articles were unfair. Still, their piece was nothing more than an exercise in "it's not our fault, really!!"
They conveniently ignored the fact that for most of the session, they ignored the Democrats in the lege.
In keeping with their "ignoring facts" motif, they also spent a couple of paragraphs sucking up to Senate President Bob Burns, praising his "leadership" during the failed session.
Don't they realize how many trees had to die to publicize their genuflections before their caucus' leader? Doesn't matter - even if they knew, they wouldn't actually care.
Tedski's commentary on this op/ed was spot on, and Donna's take was briefer, but made up for its brevity with needle-sharpness.
As such, I won't waste your time with more commentary that will mostly just repeat what others have said. I do have a couple of observations to make though.
1. The Republicans' veteran legislators and staff need to do a better job of educating their rookies.
From the piece (emphasis mine) -
2. Another interesting aspect to this:
As a result of last year's elections, all three credited authors replaced members who would have helped break the logjam in this year's legislative session.
Pierce defeated Tom O'Halleran and Melvin defeated Pete Hershberger in their respective Republican primaries. Both O'Halleran and Hershberger took their professional responsibilities seriously and worked for their constituents, not the would-be Grover Norquists of the AZ legislature. As such, they were denounced as RINOs and targeted in the primary.
Allen replaced the late Sen. Jake Flake, who nobody called a RINO (at least not to his face). However conservative he may have been, though, he found ways to get things done in the lege. He didn't use his ideological leanings as a cop-out for incompetence.
Maybe today's op/ed signals a recognition on their part, publicly admitted or not, that their presence in the Senate contributed greatly to the dysfunction on West Washington.
Or not.
Since they started realizing just how poor the public perception is of their ability to govern (even among their own party), the Republicans in the legislature and the Governor's office have been blaming the Democrats for the failure to pass a balanced budget.
They must have a pretty low opinion of the electorate since they seem to believe that no one will notice that the Republicans control both chambers of the lege and the 9th floor.
Or that the budget was done in by Republican-only infighting.
Or that most of that infighting was over what was the best tool to cut out the heart of Arizona's future - an axe or a meat cleaver.
I think that the new title adequately sums it up, though. :)
As previously observed by Tedski at Rum, Romanism, Rebellion and Donna at Democratic Diva, three Republican state senators - Sylvia Allen (LD5), Steve Pierce (LD1) and Al Melvin (LD26) - had an op/ed piece published in the AZ Republic.
In it, they blamed the state's budget woes on the Democrats and, I think, a reporter (Mary Jo Pitzl) who wrote a couple of pieces that they don't approve of.
OK, they just thought her articles were unfair. Still, their piece was nothing more than an exercise in "it's not our fault, really!!"
They conveniently ignored the fact that for most of the session, they ignored the Democrats in the lege.
In keeping with their "ignoring facts" motif, they also spent a couple of paragraphs sucking up to Senate President Bob Burns, praising his "leadership" during the failed session.
Don't they realize how many trees had to die to publicize their genuflections before their caucus' leader? Doesn't matter - even if they knew, they wouldn't actually care.
Tedski's commentary on this op/ed was spot on, and Donna's take was briefer, but made up for its brevity with needle-sharpness.
As such, I won't waste your time with more commentary that will mostly just repeat what others have said. I do have a couple of observations to make though.
1. The Republicans' veteran legislators and staff need to do a better job of educating their rookies.
From the piece (emphasis mine) -
Check your facts. This year was not the first year in history we missed the July 30 budget deadline.That quote goes a long way toward explaining the problems with this year's lege - the actual budget deadline is June 30, not July 30.
2. Another interesting aspect to this:
As a result of last year's elections, all three credited authors replaced members who would have helped break the logjam in this year's legislative session.
Pierce defeated Tom O'Halleran and Melvin defeated Pete Hershberger in their respective Republican primaries. Both O'Halleran and Hershberger took their professional responsibilities seriously and worked for their constituents, not the would-be Grover Norquists of the AZ legislature. As such, they were denounced as RINOs and targeted in the primary.
Allen replaced the late Sen. Jake Flake, who nobody called a RINO (at least not to his face). However conservative he may have been, though, he found ways to get things done in the lege. He didn't use his ideological leanings as a cop-out for incompetence.
Maybe today's op/ed signals a recognition on their part, publicly admitted or not, that their presence in the Senate contributed greatly to the dysfunction on West Washington.
Or not.
Since they started realizing just how poor the public perception is of their ability to govern (even among their own party), the Republicans in the legislature and the Governor's office have been blaming the Democrats for the failure to pass a balanced budget.
They must have a pretty low opinion of the electorate since they seem to believe that no one will notice that the Republicans control both chambers of the lege and the 9th floor.
Or that the budget was done in by Republican-only infighting.
Or that most of that infighting was over what was the best tool to cut out the heart of Arizona's future - an axe or a meat cleaver.
State Rep. David Lujan named Public Official of the Year
The Arizona Chapter of the National Association of Social Workers has named House Democratic Leader David Lujan as its "Public Official of the Year."
“Rep. Lujan has been a champion for causes that social workers care about,” said Carol Stambaugh, executive director of the Arizona chapter of the National Association of Social Workers. “This year especially, he has helped protect Arizona children and families from destructive budget cuts during tough economic times.”
Lujan has worked to protect children's rights by strengthening incest and polygamy laws. He has also worked to enact laws protecting victims of domestic violence and abuse.
Even more important than writing laws and legislation, Lujan has trained and educated hundreds of attorneys, law enforcement officials, and child protection workers/advocates on laws pertaining to child abuse, domestic violence, juvenile and dependency law.
In addition to his legislative work, Lujan is staff attorney for Defender of Children, an organization dedicated to assisting abused children.
Representative Lujan will accept the honor at NASWAZ's Summit 2009 conference on September 25 at the Franciscan Renewal Center.
“Rep. Lujan has been a champion for causes that social workers care about,” said Carol Stambaugh, executive director of the Arizona chapter of the National Association of Social Workers. “This year especially, he has helped protect Arizona children and families from destructive budget cuts during tough economic times.”
Lujan has worked to protect children's rights by strengthening incest and polygamy laws. He has also worked to enact laws protecting victims of domestic violence and abuse.
Even more important than writing laws and legislation, Lujan has trained and educated hundreds of attorneys, law enforcement officials, and child protection workers/advocates on laws pertaining to child abuse, domestic violence, juvenile and dependency law.
In addition to his legislative work, Lujan is staff attorney for Defender of Children, an organization dedicated to assisting abused children.
Representative Lujan will accept the honor at NASWAZ's Summit 2009 conference on September 25 at the Franciscan Renewal Center.
Harry Mitchell and continuing the discussion on health care reform
Throughout the month of August, I have had the opportunity to listen to the thoughts and concerns of thousands of constituents across Arizona’s Fifth Congressional District on the topic of health care reform and the proposals going through Congress.
Nearly 30,000 constituents participated in my telephone town halls, my office has received over 20,000 calls, letters and emails and I've met with hundreds of constituents, business leaders, health care providers and students through multiple meetings, forums and community visits. Additionally, more than 6,500 Arizona residents have filled out my online health insurance reform survey. A majority of those I've heard from have shared their personal stories, thoughts and concerns about reforming our health care system.
One thing that has come up in conversation after conversation, in every venue and across the political spectrum is agreement that our current health care system needs reform. There is a real desire from Republicans, Democrats, and Independents to fix what is broken and preserve what works.
I believe we can see meaningful reform if we build upon the fundamental principles
we can agree on. I want to thank all of you who have taken the time to contribute to this critical conversation: discussing concerns, sharing stories, and offering ideas. But while I have heard from many of you, I don’t want the conversation to stop here.
Health care is an intensely emotional and personal issue, and while the rhetoric has sometimes gotten heated, everyone ultimately wants the same outcome. We all want the best, most affordable health care for ourselves and our loved ones. As we continue this discussion, please stay in touch and continue sharing your ideas and input. Your voices, your concerns, and your feedback are helpful as Congress resumes its work on meaningful reform.
Finally, I want to encourage you to continue following the debate by visiting the Health Insurance Reform Resource Page on my website. This resource page will continue to be updated as proposals take form, provides useful resources and links to help separate fact from fiction, and makes available my responses to more than a dozen or so questions I’ve most often heard or have been asked about throughout the debate.
Thank you again for continuing to provide me with your input, for being involved and for your active participation on this important issue.
Sincerely,
Harry
Later...
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Quote of the week - IOKIYAR edition
Republican Senator Jon Kyl, AZ's own Big Insurance lobbyist, provides a gem this week.
From the Arizona Republic -
So, after a summer during which Republicans all over the country referred to President Obama as a "Nazi" and/or "socialist"; where health insurance industry lies are regarded as Gospel truth by Rep members of Congress; where teabaggers shouted down supporters of health care reform at public forums; where other teabaggers hung an effigy of a Congressman because of his support of health care reform; members of Congress continued to spread the lie that President Obama isn't a citizen; a dozen armed protesters, including one with an assault rifle, greeted President Obama when he visited Phoenix in August; an Obama speech to students that advised them to stay in school, listen to their teachers, and do their homework was criticized at "too political" by Republicans; where...you know.
That's all OK with Kyl. Apparently, he doesn't consider those actions and words to be "inappropriately pugnacious."
Telling Reps that they will be held accountable for their part in coarsening public discourse, now *that* is too "pugnacious."
From the Arizona Republic -
...Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., said Obama deserves some of the blame for the polarization, saying the president went out of his way to be "unnecessarily politically pugnacious" during his speech to the joint session of Congress.
Obama took several shots at his health-reform critics, at one point vowing, "If you misrepresent what's in this plan, we will call you out."
So, after a summer during which Republicans all over the country referred to President Obama as a "Nazi" and/or "socialist"; where health insurance industry lies are regarded as Gospel truth by Rep members of Congress; where teabaggers shouted down supporters of health care reform at public forums; where other teabaggers hung an effigy of a Congressman because of his support of health care reform; members of Congress continued to spread the lie that President Obama isn't a citizen; a dozen armed protesters, including one with an assault rifle, greeted President Obama when he visited Phoenix in August; an Obama speech to students that advised them to stay in school, listen to their teachers, and do their homework was criticized at "too political" by Republicans; where...you know.
That's all OK with Kyl. Apparently, he doesn't consider those actions and words to be "inappropriately pugnacious."
Telling Reps that they will be held accountable for their part in coarsening public discourse, now *that* is too "pugnacious."
The coming week...
As usual, except where noted, all info gathered from the websites of the relevant political bodies/agencies, and subject to change without notice.
...The U.S. House will be back in session on Monday. The agenda includes:
- An as-yet-unnumbered resolution from Arizona's Raul Grijalva (D-CD7)"Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that a National Hispanic-Serving Institutions Week should be established."
- H.R. 3146, 21st Century FHA Housing Act of 2009
- H.R. 3527, FHA Multifamily Loan Limit Adjustment Act of 2009. CRS summary here.
- H.R. 3179, SIG TARP Small Business Awareness Act of 2009. "SIG TARP" is an abbreviation for "Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program."
The above four bills will be heard under suspension of the rules of the House, whichs means that a 2/3 majority vote will be required for their passage. Inclusion on the agenda this way means that leadership expects them to pass with wide, if not unanimous, support. No guarantees on that, though.
Other measures up for consideration (subject to Rules Committee consideration this week) :
- H.R. 3246, Advanced Vehicle Technology Act of 2009. CRS summary here. From the summary: "Authorizes appropriations to the Secretary of Energy for research, development, demonstration, and commercial application of vehicles and related technologies for FY2010-FY2014."
- H.R. 3221, Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2009. CRS summary here. Not a major initiative, but if passed into law, it would serve to increase higher education opportunities for the less affluent in society.
In other words, the Republicans will hate it.
...Over in the U.S. Senate, floor time will be taken up with consideration of budget matters this week (USDOT/HUD appropriations in particular). They also have a full slate of committee hearings. One hearing that should involve discussion of the status quo in AZ is the Judiciary Committee's hearing on "Human Rights at Home: Mental Illness in U.S. Prisons and Jails."
The hearing *should* involve a discussion of Joe Arpaio's failure to provide proper health care (mental and physical) to prisoners in Maricopa County's jails, the Edgar Vega case (where a retarded 16-year old was sent to an adult prison to die for a crime he couldn't understand, much less commit) and the other failures of the jail and prison systems in Arizona.
It won't, though.
Also of possible AZ interest this week could be the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs' hearing on "...the federal tax treatment of health care benefits provided by tribal governments to their citizens."
...The Arizona Legislature is still way out of session and the state's budget is still way out of balance.
...The Arizona Corporation Commission has a special open meeting on Tuesday in Tucson. More info on the subject matter here. Its full hearing schedule is here.
...The Citizens Clean Election Commission has a meeting scheduled for Thursday, but the only agenda posted so far is for the CCEC's meeting of July 30.
...The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors has an informal meeting scheduled for Monday. The agenda includes yet another executive session. It also has a formal meeting scheduled for Wednesday, but the agenda hasn't been posted online as yet.
...The Tempe City Council is scheduled to meet on Thursday. The agenda hasn't been posted yet.
...The Scottsdale City Council has a special executive session meeting planned for Tuesday to consider candidates for the position of Interim City Treasurer. The Council also has a work/study meeting planned for Tuesday.
The City's Charter Review Task Force is scheduled to meet Monday. No ORANGE Coalition, Goldwater Institute, or other corporate shills are listed on the agenda, but this may be worth keeping an eye on.
Not scheduled to meet this week: Arizona Board of Regents, Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District, the Boards of Directors of the Maricopa Integrated Health System and the Central Arizona Project.
...The U.S. House will be back in session on Monday. The agenda includes:
- An as-yet-unnumbered resolution from Arizona's Raul Grijalva (D-CD7)"Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that a National Hispanic-Serving Institutions Week should be established."
- H.R. 3146, 21st Century FHA Housing Act of 2009
- H.R. 3527, FHA Multifamily Loan Limit Adjustment Act of 2009. CRS summary here.
- H.R. 3179, SIG TARP Small Business Awareness Act of 2009. "SIG TARP" is an abbreviation for "Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program."
The above four bills will be heard under suspension of the rules of the House, whichs means that a 2/3 majority vote will be required for their passage. Inclusion on the agenda this way means that leadership expects them to pass with wide, if not unanimous, support. No guarantees on that, though.
Other measures up for consideration (subject to Rules Committee consideration this week) :
- H.R. 3246, Advanced Vehicle Technology Act of 2009. CRS summary here. From the summary: "Authorizes appropriations to the Secretary of Energy for research, development, demonstration, and commercial application of vehicles and related technologies for FY2010-FY2014."
- H.R. 3221, Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2009. CRS summary here. Not a major initiative, but if passed into law, it would serve to increase higher education opportunities for the less affluent in society.
In other words, the Republicans will hate it.
...Over in the U.S. Senate, floor time will be taken up with consideration of budget matters this week (USDOT/HUD appropriations in particular). They also have a full slate of committee hearings. One hearing that should involve discussion of the status quo in AZ is the Judiciary Committee's hearing on "Human Rights at Home: Mental Illness in U.S. Prisons and Jails."
The hearing *should* involve a discussion of Joe Arpaio's failure to provide proper health care (mental and physical) to prisoners in Maricopa County's jails, the Edgar Vega case (where a retarded 16-year old was sent to an adult prison to die for a crime he couldn't understand, much less commit) and the other failures of the jail and prison systems in Arizona.
It won't, though.
Also of possible AZ interest this week could be the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs' hearing on "...the federal tax treatment of health care benefits provided by tribal governments to their citizens."
...The Arizona Legislature is still way out of session and the state's budget is still way out of balance.
...The Arizona Corporation Commission has a special open meeting on Tuesday in Tucson. More info on the subject matter here. Its full hearing schedule is here.
...The Citizens Clean Election Commission has a meeting scheduled for Thursday, but the only agenda posted so far is for the CCEC's meeting of July 30.
...The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors has an informal meeting scheduled for Monday. The agenda includes yet another executive session. It also has a formal meeting scheduled for Wednesday, but the agenda hasn't been posted online as yet.
...The Tempe City Council is scheduled to meet on Thursday. The agenda hasn't been posted yet.
...The Scottsdale City Council has a special executive session meeting planned for Tuesday to consider candidates for the position of Interim City Treasurer. The Council also has a work/study meeting planned for Tuesday.
The City's Charter Review Task Force is scheduled to meet Monday. No ORANGE Coalition, Goldwater Institute, or other corporate shills are listed on the agenda, but this may be worth keeping an eye on.
Not scheduled to meet this week: Arizona Board of Regents, Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District, the Boards of Directors of the Maricopa Integrated Health System and the Central Arizona Project.
Friday, September 11, 2009
Short attention span musing...
Haven't done one of these in a long time, and since there are a couple of things in today's news worthy of comment, it's appropriate to do one now.
...Colleen Clark, president of the Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District has revealed that in July, she was arrested for DUI in Scottsdale. (AZCentral.com coverage here; Phoenix New Times coverage here)
Fellow board member Debra Pearson (nee Brimhall) has called for Clark's resignation, citing the arrest as evidence of "immature behavior."
Ummm...given that when Pearson was in the state lege, she was best known for marching in a parade in a Xena costume, maybe she shouldn't be pointing fingers...anyway, I digress.
On this one, given the facts available thus far - no one was injured, apparently this was a "first-and-only" incident, and she didn't try to use her office and influence to get out of the arrest - she should be allowed to face the music but keep her office.
In the event that some readers think that this opinion is one partisan Democrat supporting another, think again.
Ms. Clark is a Republican and a teacher/coach at her church and works for an Illinois-based abstinence project.
In short, she's easily conservative enough to be a member of the "Bay at the Moon" Club on West Washington.
Even so, she gets to be human (unless one of the material facts cited above changes.)
The Governing Board would have been better served if instead of calling for Clark's resignation, Pearson had pushed for the resignation of member Jerry Walker after the incident earlier this year where he used his office and presence on a District-sponsored field trip to intimidate a student to tears over her advocacy for the DREAM Act.
*That* one merited removal from office.
...Does the Fifester realize that he was pardoned because the President owed a favor to someone who owed Fife a favor, not because he was wrongfully convicted?
Apparently not, because he says he is considering a run for Governor in 2010.
The money quote from the AZRepublic article linked above?
No Fife, your record is NOT clean. Of course, in today's AZGOP, that doesn't mean anything.
...Hmmmm...wonder if Laura Knaperek is looking for someone, *anyone*, to take on and defeat Harry Mitchell, who has defeated her so many times? And if "anyone" means "anyone not named David Schweikert"??
Note: Schweikert had the audacity to beat Knaperek in last year's GOP primary in CD5.
Let's see -
One "Ray Torres" has a letter to the editor in Friday's AZ Republic criticizing Harry Mitchell and expressing support for Jim Ward, a candidate in next year's GOP primary in CD5.
One "Ramon Torres," nicknamed "Ray" is the chair of the ORANGE Coalition in Scottsdale (allegedly in Scottsdale, anyway*).
A director of that organization is one...Laura Knaperek, former LD17 state representative and failed Congressional candidate.
*Hmmmm...the ORANGE Coalition isn't registered as a political committee (even though it was lobbying the City of Scottsdale via its Charter Review Task Force); it's registered as a non-profit Arizona corporation. Both directors listed on the organizational paperwork, including Mr. Ray Torres, list a New Jersey address (or as they like to refer to it - "really eastern Scottsdale").
BTW - the New Jersey address listed is the same as that of the headquarters of American Water, the parent company of Arizona American Water.
Not exactly a shocking coincidence, that.
It will be fun to watch Mr. Ward's campaign finance reports for money from New Jersey and American Water.
Later...
...Colleen Clark, president of the Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District has revealed that in July, she was arrested for DUI in Scottsdale. (AZCentral.com coverage here; Phoenix New Times coverage here)
Fellow board member Debra Pearson (nee Brimhall) has called for Clark's resignation, citing the arrest as evidence of "immature behavior."
Ummm...given that when Pearson was in the state lege, she was best known for marching in a parade in a Xena costume, maybe she shouldn't be pointing fingers...anyway, I digress.
On this one, given the facts available thus far - no one was injured, apparently this was a "first-and-only" incident, and she didn't try to use her office and influence to get out of the arrest - she should be allowed to face the music but keep her office.
In the event that some readers think that this opinion is one partisan Democrat supporting another, think again.
Ms. Clark is a Republican and a teacher/coach at her church and works for an Illinois-based abstinence project.
In short, she's easily conservative enough to be a member of the "Bay at the Moon" Club on West Washington.
Even so, she gets to be human (unless one of the material facts cited above changes.)
The Governing Board would have been better served if instead of calling for Clark's resignation, Pearson had pushed for the resignation of member Jerry Walker after the incident earlier this year where he used his office and presence on a District-sponsored field trip to intimidate a student to tears over her advocacy for the DREAM Act.
*That* one merited removal from office.
...Does the Fifester realize that he was pardoned because the President owed a favor to someone who owed Fife a favor, not because he was wrongfully convicted?
Apparently not, because he says he is considering a run for Governor in 2010.
The money quote from the AZRepublic article linked above?
"My record is clean," Symington said. "I won at the end of the day."
No Fife, your record is NOT clean. Of course, in today's AZGOP, that doesn't mean anything.
...Hmmmm...wonder if Laura Knaperek is looking for someone, *anyone*, to take on and defeat Harry Mitchell, who has defeated her so many times? And if "anyone" means "anyone not named David Schweikert"??
Note: Schweikert had the audacity to beat Knaperek in last year's GOP primary in CD5.
Let's see -
One "Ray Torres" has a letter to the editor in Friday's AZ Republic criticizing Harry Mitchell and expressing support for Jim Ward, a candidate in next year's GOP primary in CD5.
One "Ramon Torres," nicknamed "Ray" is the chair of the ORANGE Coalition in Scottsdale (allegedly in Scottsdale, anyway*).
A director of that organization is one...Laura Knaperek, former LD17 state representative and failed Congressional candidate.
*Hmmmm...the ORANGE Coalition isn't registered as a political committee (even though it was lobbying the City of Scottsdale via its Charter Review Task Force); it's registered as a non-profit Arizona corporation. Both directors listed on the organizational paperwork, including Mr. Ray Torres, list a New Jersey address (or as they like to refer to it - "really eastern Scottsdale").
BTW - the New Jersey address listed is the same as that of the headquarters of American Water, the parent company of Arizona American Water.
Not exactly a shocking coincidence, that.
It will be fun to watch Mr. Ward's campaign finance reports for money from New Jersey and American Water.
Later...
Wednesday, September 09, 2009
Obama's address on health care reform; a solid triple to deep center
Overall, it wasn't quite an unequivocal endorsement of a strong public option (hence, not a home run),but it was really good*.
*Actually, I thought this speech a solid double, but the line "it will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition" rates an extra base, with a wide turn at third. :)
Excerpts of the speech are posted here.
A full transcript is here.
Some of the highlights included a definite tone of not kissing the insurance industry's a** and not caving into the "scare tactics" of their lapdogs (my word, not his :) )in the GOP.
Yet, as firm as he was in his message about making sure that that all Americans are able to find affordable and effective health insurance coverage, the President offered a couple of olive branches to the GOPers -
Consideration of mandating that everyone obtain coverage
Creation of an insurance exchange that would allow private insurers to compete for new customers (OK, so competition isn't exactly what the GOP and the insurers were looking for...it beats being put out of business.)
A discussion and experimentation with medical malpractice reform (this one brought forth the only standing ovation from the Republicans; for the rest of the speech, they sat on their hands...well, all of them except Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina. More on that in a moment.)
Continuing the baseball metaphor that starts this post, now it is up to Congress.
The past few weeks have been the equivalent of the seventh inning stretch, and tonight's speech was a case of Barack Obama leading off the bottom of the seventh with a clutch lead-off triple.
Now he's standing on third, waiting for the Democrats in Congress to drive him in.
A few days ago, I wrote how it was time for President Obama to step up. He did so tonight.
Now it is time for Congress to step up too.
We know it won't be Sen. Max Baucus, he's the equivalent of the 1919 Chicago Black Sox in this metaphor (except instead of taking money from gamblers to throw the World Series, he's taken campaign contributions from the health insurance industry in exchange for going into the tank on this).
It might be Speaker Nancy Pelosi (maybe - she's been making some of the right noises recently).
It might be Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (less likely I think, but still in the realm of possibility).
It could be someone from deep in the backbenches like CD5's Harry Mitchell, grabbing a bat and stepping into the batter's box like Kirk Gibson did in the 1988 World Series.
*Somebody* will step up.
...And that somebody will have to be a Democrat. Rep. Wilson's behavior during the speech demonstrated exactly how much contempt that the Republicans have for civil discourse in modern politics and modern society.
During the speech, when President Obama pledged that the proposed reforms would not provide insurance coverage for illegal immigrants, Wilson, perhaps thinking that he was among teabaggers at one of this summer's town halls, shouted "You lie!"
Not even during the worst depredations of the Bush Administration when most Democrats and many independents called for impeachments and criminal investigations and more, did a member of Congress show so much disrespect for the office of the President and the institution of Congress.
Wilson later issued an apology for the timing of his outburst (apparently the boos and dirty looks, some even from members of his own party, reminded him of his place), but stopped short of either retracting the statement or providing evidence that the President did, in fact, lie.
Expect more of the same, though perhaps in a more genteel manner, in the coming weeks.
*Actually, I thought this speech a solid double, but the line "it will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition" rates an extra base, with a wide turn at third. :)
Excerpts of the speech are posted here.
A full transcript is here.
Some of the highlights included a definite tone of not kissing the insurance industry's a** and not caving into the "scare tactics" of their lapdogs (my word, not his :) )in the GOP.
Yet, as firm as he was in his message about making sure that that all Americans are able to find affordable and effective health insurance coverage, the President offered a couple of olive branches to the GOPers -
Consideration of mandating that everyone obtain coverage
Creation of an insurance exchange that would allow private insurers to compete for new customers (OK, so competition isn't exactly what the GOP and the insurers were looking for...it beats being put out of business.)
A discussion and experimentation with medical malpractice reform (this one brought forth the only standing ovation from the Republicans; for the rest of the speech, they sat on their hands...well, all of them except Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina. More on that in a moment.)
Continuing the baseball metaphor that starts this post, now it is up to Congress.
The past few weeks have been the equivalent of the seventh inning stretch, and tonight's speech was a case of Barack Obama leading off the bottom of the seventh with a clutch lead-off triple.
Now he's standing on third, waiting for the Democrats in Congress to drive him in.
A few days ago, I wrote how it was time for President Obama to step up. He did so tonight.
Now it is time for Congress to step up too.
We know it won't be Sen. Max Baucus, he's the equivalent of the 1919 Chicago Black Sox in this metaphor (except instead of taking money from gamblers to throw the World Series, he's taken campaign contributions from the health insurance industry in exchange for going into the tank on this).
It might be Speaker Nancy Pelosi (maybe - she's been making some of the right noises recently).
It might be Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (less likely I think, but still in the realm of possibility).
It could be someone from deep in the backbenches like CD5's Harry Mitchell, grabbing a bat and stepping into the batter's box like Kirk Gibson did in the 1988 World Series.
*Somebody* will step up.
...And that somebody will have to be a Democrat. Rep. Wilson's behavior during the speech demonstrated exactly how much contempt that the Republicans have for civil discourse in modern politics and modern society.
During the speech, when President Obama pledged that the proposed reforms would not provide insurance coverage for illegal immigrants, Wilson, perhaps thinking that he was among teabaggers at one of this summer's town halls, shouted "You lie!"
Not even during the worst depredations of the Bush Administration when most Democrats and many independents called for impeachments and criminal investigations and more, did a member of Congress show so much disrespect for the office of the President and the institution of Congress.
Wilson later issued an apology for the timing of his outburst (apparently the boos and dirty looks, some even from members of his own party, reminded him of his place), but stopped short of either retracting the statement or providing evidence that the President did, in fact, lie.
Expect more of the same, though perhaps in a more genteel manner, in the coming weeks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)