Every election cycle, a lot of attention is paid to elected officials attempting to move up a level.
Look at the amount of coverage that Harry Mitchell and Gabrielle Giffords received during their moves from the state lege to the U.S. Congress in 2006, or that Ann Kirkpatrick received while making the same move in 2008. Even this year, some of the most covered candidates are those like Jonathan Paton, Pam Gorman, Jim Waring, and Sam Crump, all of whom are attempting the same move. In addition, due to term limits (both in the lege and in statewide offices), a number of legislators (and other "big names" politically) are trying to move to statewide offices - Verschoor, Huppenthal, Leff, Thomas, Lujan, Garcia and more.
Perhaps lost in the clutter this year is the number of legislators looking to step "down" a level (though to be fair, many observers think that the AZ lege is so low, any move away from it is a step "up").
- State Sen. Jay Tibshraeny (R) is running for mayor of Chandler
- Rep. Ben Miranda (D) (or someone with the same name at the same address) is running for constable in the South Mountain Justice Precinct
- former State Rep. Mark Anderson (R) is running for Justice of the Peace in West Mesa
- State Sen. Meg Burton Cahill (D) is running for Justice of the Peace in the University Lakes justice precinct (aka - East Tempe)
- State Sen. Ken Cheuvront (D) is running for Justice of the Peace in the Encanto Justice Precinct
- Radio and internet talk show host Jeff Farias is running for Justice of the Peace in the Downtown Justice Precinct
- And in a blast from the recent past (non-lege genus), Daniel Washburn, the pro-tem Justice of the Peace who gave John Huppenthal, then a state senator and now a candidate for state superintendent of public instruction, a complete walk on political sign tampering and misdemeanor theft charges is running for a Superior Court judge position in Pinal County. Reading his campaign finance reports should be interesting. Fun, even, especially if the name "Huppenthal" (or anyone affiliated with Huppenthal) appears on his list of contributors.
This should be an interesting year with some interesting stories, and not just in the high profile races. Stay tuned...
Most candidate status info courtesy the unofficial list of candidates published by the Maricopa County Recorder's Office; more info gathered from the list of candidates published by the Pinal County Recorder's Office. Many (but not all) of the other counties in Arizona have similar lists up, but I didn't notice any really familiar names on those.
Monday, May 31, 2010
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Supporters of SB1070 showing their true colors
From AZFamily.com -
The video at the story link shows that the vocal fan of Hitler quoted in the story is someone familiar most readers of this blog - J.T. Ready, neo-Nazi and friend of the author of SB1070, Russell Pearce.
Rallies were held for supporters on both sides of Arizona's immigration law on Saturday. The "National Day of Action against SB 1070" rally took place in downtown Phoenix Saturday morning. And the "Stand with Arizona" pro-SB 1070 rally was held at Tempe's Diablo Stadium Saturday evening.
Both events were peacful, passionate gatherings of like-minded individuals in support of their respective positions. However, a few supporters of Arizona's new immigration law were also on-hand at the anti-SB 1070 rally.
Two men carrying loaded weapons and waiving a confederate flag said they were there to support SB 1070. One man was carrying a loaded shotgun and wearing a White People's Party shirt. The other said he was a big fan of Hitler, calling him a "great White civil rights leader."
The video at the story link shows that the vocal fan of Hitler quoted in the story is someone familiar most readers of this blog - J.T. Ready, neo-Nazi and friend of the author of SB1070, Russell Pearce.
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.
...At the federal level, both the U.S. House and Senate are on a break. They'll be back in session next week.
...Back here in Arizona...
- The Arizona Corporation Commission doesn't have any regular meetings scheduled, however they will be travelling to gather public comment on specific issues.
-- On Wednesday at 1 p.m., they will be holding a special meeting in Tucson to solicit public comments on line extension policies for Arizona utilities.
-- Later on Wednesday, they will hold two public meetings in Nogales. The first will start at 6 p.m. and will concern Rio Rico Utilities rates; the second is scheduled to start at 7 p.m. and will concern Valle Verde Water Company rates.
-- The ACC's hearing schedule is here. Most of this week's hearing activity involves Arizona American Water (a name near and not-so-dear to Scottsdale readers :) ).
- The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors will meet on Tuesday at 11:30 a.m. It's a special meeting with one topic - a settlement with the Department of Labor over MCSO's forcing detention officers to work unpaid overtime. AZ Republic coverage of the matter here.
- The Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project will have a busy week.
-- On Tuesday at 1 p.m., there will be a meeting of the Project ADD Water group.
-- On Thursday at 9 a.m., the Board's Public Policy Committee will meet.
-- After the committee meeting, the full Board with hold a regular meeting. The highlights of this meeting will be the setting of property tax and service rates.
- The Tempe City Council isn't meeting this week; the Council Calendar of events is here.
- The Scottsdale City Council also isn't meeting this week; the City of Scottsdale's Community Meeting Notice is here.
Note: When memorial service arrangements for late Councilman Tony Nelssen are announced, an update will be posted.
Not meeting this week: Citizens Clean Elections Commission, Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District, Board of Directors of the Maricopa Integrated Health System, Arizona Board of Regents
...At the federal level, both the U.S. House and Senate are on a break. They'll be back in session next week.
...Back here in Arizona...
- The Arizona Corporation Commission doesn't have any regular meetings scheduled, however they will be travelling to gather public comment on specific issues.
-- On Wednesday at 1 p.m., they will be holding a special meeting in Tucson to solicit public comments on line extension policies for Arizona utilities.
-- Later on Wednesday, they will hold two public meetings in Nogales. The first will start at 6 p.m. and will concern Rio Rico Utilities rates; the second is scheduled to start at 7 p.m. and will concern Valle Verde Water Company rates.
-- The ACC's hearing schedule is here. Most of this week's hearing activity involves Arizona American Water (a name near and not-so-dear to Scottsdale readers :) ).
- The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors will meet on Tuesday at 11:30 a.m. It's a special meeting with one topic - a settlement with the Department of Labor over MCSO's forcing detention officers to work unpaid overtime. AZ Republic coverage of the matter here.
- The Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project will have a busy week.
-- On Tuesday at 1 p.m., there will be a meeting of the Project ADD Water group.
-- On Thursday at 9 a.m., the Board's Public Policy Committee will meet.
-- After the committee meeting, the full Board with hold a regular meeting. The highlights of this meeting will be the setting of property tax and service rates.
- The Tempe City Council isn't meeting this week; the Council Calendar of events is here.
- The Scottsdale City Council also isn't meeting this week; the City of Scottsdale's Community Meeting Notice is here.
Note: When memorial service arrangements for late Councilman Tony Nelssen are announced, an update will be posted.
Not meeting this week: Citizens Clean Elections Commission, Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District, Board of Directors of the Maricopa Integrated Health System, Arizona Board of Regents
In any other state...
In any other state, would a candidate for state treasurer tout the endorsement of someone who is fighting an investigation into the fiscal mismanagement of his department?
Just one question - do Verschoor's signs in other counties contain the part about the endorsement, or is that a Maricopa-only phenomenon?
Scottsdale's election picture comes into focus
With the passage of Wednesday's deadline for submitting nomination petitions, the ballot for this fall's City Council election has been set.
There had been 10 candidates with open committees for the race for the three open seats, and six candidates will appear on the ballot.
Of the other four, incumbent Tony Nelssen passed away earlier this week, businessman Bill Crawford ended his candidacy months ago, attorney Jose Luis Penalosa, Jr. has since set his sights on the Republican nomination to challenge Democratic incumbent Ed Pastor in CD4 (as "Joe Penalosa"), and Sean Shepherd..well, I don't know. He didn't turn in sigs and won't be on the ballot, otherwise I don't know anything about him.
The candidate list in Scottsdale, courtesy the City of Scottsdale's website -
Note: The way that I read the section of the City Charter related to the filling of a vacancy on the Council, the remaining members will vote to appoint someone to serve out the remainder of Tony Nelssen's term, which expires at the end of the year. I'm not sure who is likely to get the spot, or even likely to apply for the job, but it seems unlikely that the Council will appoint one of the current candidates for election - doing so could unfairly give that candidate an advantage this fall.
Note2: Petitions could still be challenged, so it is possible that one or more of the candidates above won't be on the fall ballot, but that seems unlikely at this point.
When candidate forums are organized and announced, the schedule will be posted here.
There had been 10 candidates with open committees for the race for the three open seats, and six candidates will appear on the ballot.
Of the other four, incumbent Tony Nelssen passed away earlier this week, businessman Bill Crawford ended his candidacy months ago, attorney Jose Luis Penalosa, Jr. has since set his sights on the Republican nomination to challenge Democratic incumbent Ed Pastor in CD4 (as "Joe Penalosa"), and Sean Shepherd..well, I don't know. He didn't turn in sigs and won't be on the ballot, otherwise I don't know anything about him.
The candidate list in Scottsdale, courtesy the City of Scottsdale's website -
Wayne Ecton
Ecton for City Council
Phone: (480) 488-1033
Email: elect@wayneecton.com
Website: www.wayneecton.com
Bob Littlefield
Vote Littlefield
Phone: (602) 288-9145
Email: bob@boblittlfield.com
Website: www.boblittlefield.com
Linda Milhaven
Milhaven for Scottsdale
Phone: (480) 295-3275
Email: Linda@MilhavenforScottsdale.com
Website: www.MilhavenforScottsdale.com
Ned O'Hearn
Committee to Elect Ned O'Hearn
Phone: (480) 661-1314
Email: Ned@NedForCouncil.com
Website: www.NedForCouncil.com
Guy Phillips
Committee to Elect Guy Phillips
Phone: (480) 560-6124
Email: guyrphillips@gmail.com
Website: www.electguy.intuitwebsites.com
Dennis Robbins
Robbins for Council 2010
Phone: (480) 994-0302
Email: azdrob@aol.com
Website: www.votedennisrobbins.com
Note: The way that I read the section of the City Charter related to the filling of a vacancy on the Council, the remaining members will vote to appoint someone to serve out the remainder of Tony Nelssen's term, which expires at the end of the year. I'm not sure who is likely to get the spot, or even likely to apply for the job, but it seems unlikely that the Council will appoint one of the current candidates for election - doing so could unfairly give that candidate an advantage this fall.
Note2: Petitions could still be challenged, so it is possible that one or more of the candidates above won't be on the fall ballot, but that seems unlikely at this point.
When candidate forums are organized and announced, the schedule will be posted here.
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Perhaps we should judge SB1070 by what it *doesn't* contain
Much of the furor over the passage of SB1070 (and its modifier, HB2162) has been rooted in fears that the new law creates a legal cover for ethnic profiling and discrimination on the part of Arizona officialdom.
Defenders of the measure try to deflect such concerns by citing the line in SB1070 that reads -
That clause *does* sound good, until you compare it to the other clauses in the measure, the ones that have caused so much angst across the country and across the globe.
- There are the commandments (explanation of the use of the word "shall" by David Safier at Blog for AZ here) for all police officers and other government officials, no matter their level, to enforce immigration laws and to verify the immigration status of any member of the public with whom they have contact, followed by the section that allows any resident of AZ to sue if he or she doesn't think that an official/political subdivision is enthusiastic enough in toeing the nativist line -
There are civil fines created to serve as punishments for entitities, with the monies collected and reserved for anti-immigrant activities by the Department of Public Safety.
- There are also a myriad of felony and misdemeanor violations created for various acts and missteps by immigrants (failure to carry the proper paperwork at all times, roadside solicitation of unemployment, etc.) and anyone who attempts to aid one in any way (even taking an injured undocumented immigrant to the hospital is a crime), each of which comes with its own punishments.
So what does the measure *not* have?
Any sort of penalties for the violation of the "no profiling" clause, or for falsely arresting someone for a violation, or incorrectly deporting someone, or...
Why do I not think that this particular omission was an accident?
Defenders of the measure try to deflect such concerns by citing the line in SB1070 that reads -
A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY NOT SOLELY CONSIDER RACE, COLOR OR NATIONAL ORIGIN IN IMPLEMENTING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SUBSECTION EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY THE UNITED STATES OR ARIZONA CONSTITUTION.Sounds good, doesn't it?
That clause *does* sound good, until you compare it to the other clauses in the measure, the ones that have caused so much angst across the country and across the globe.
- There are the commandments (explanation of the use of the word "shall" by David Safier at Blog for AZ here) for all police officers and other government officials, no matter their level, to enforce immigration laws and to verify the immigration status of any member of the public with whom they have contact, followed by the section that allows any resident of AZ to sue if he or she doesn't think that an official/political subdivision is enthusiastic enough in toeing the nativist line -
A PERSON WHO IS A LEGAL RESIDENT OF THIS STATE MAY BRING AN ACTION IN SUPERIOR COURT TO CHALLENGE ANY OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE THAT ADOPTS OR IMPLEMENTS A POLICY OR PRACTICE THAT LIMITS OR RESTRICTS THE ENFORCEMENT OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS TO LESS THAN THE FULL EXTENT PERMITTED BY FEDERAL LAW.
There are civil fines created to serve as punishments for entitities, with the monies collected and reserved for anti-immigrant activities by the Department of Public Safety.
- There are also a myriad of felony and misdemeanor violations created for various acts and missteps by immigrants (failure to carry the proper paperwork at all times, roadside solicitation of unemployment, etc.) and anyone who attempts to aid one in any way (even taking an injured undocumented immigrant to the hospital is a crime), each of which comes with its own punishments.
So what does the measure *not* have?
Any sort of penalties for the violation of the "no profiling" clause, or for falsely arresting someone for a violation, or incorrectly deporting someone, or...
Why do I not think that this particular omission was an accident?
Friday, May 28, 2010
Response from decertified Clean Elections candidate
Earlier this week, I posted about a Republican candidate for state senate in LD7, Robert Green. He was decertified as a Clean Elections candidate and fined due to some rules violations.
Green contacted me later in the week and asked for an opportunity to explain his position on what happened.
As I firmly believe in fairness, I agreed to put publish a brief statement written by Mr. Green.
I take no position on the correctness CCEC's decision or Mr. Green's response, other than to say he was very civil when we spoke and deserves a chance to have his take on the matter heard.
From an email -
Green is still running for Republican nomination for the state senate in a four-way race against Nancy Barto, Ray Barnes, and Brad Buch.
I have emailed the Citizens Clean Elections Commission to offer them the opportunity to put forth a statement on this. I don't expect them to do so, but will publish their response if they send one.
Later...
Green contacted me later in the week and asked for an opportunity to explain his position on what happened.
As I firmly believe in fairness, I agreed to put publish a brief statement written by Mr. Green.
I take no position on the correctness CCEC's decision or Mr. Green's response, other than to say he was very civil when we spoke and deserves a chance to have his take on the matter heard.
From an email -
In March, I turned in 265 Clean Election Qualifying forms. Of those, approximately 75 were gathered by employees that I hired from Craigslist to do temp work for my business. Since they were well paid, 3 of them agreed to volunteer to help get signatures. The initial report back from the County Recorder said 136 signatures were invalid. After a visual inspection of each one, I filed 2 appeals to have the signatures reviewed. Before the 2nd appeal, I was informed that CCEC was doing an investigation and felt that all 136 were invalid. Due to my efforts, about half of those have since been ruled valid. Many of the remaining were ruled to be invalid, all of those gathered by 2 of the volunteers. The forms were turned in to me without a signature from the solicitor; my error in judgment is that after verifying the voter registration, I signed the forms and turned them in, making me responsible.
Prior to being informed of an investigation, I turned in another 160 CCEC forms of which over 140 were valid, putting my final total of valid forms to be approximately 340, well over the 220 minimum requirement.
While I do respect the CCEC decision on decertification, I do feel it was excessive and punitive; I am responsible for the volunteers and signing forms that I should not have, however, there is no way for a candidate to check signatures prior to submission to the Secretary of State - we can only check if voter registration and address is valid. I did not falsify any information or break any CCEC rules.
I will file an appeal, however, given the late date, it is unlikely that a decision in my favor would come in time to help my campaign. I will continue to campaign with a very limited budget and hope that voters will consider my experience, knowledge, and desire to help Arizona recover when it is time to vote in the primaries.
Bob Green
Green is still running for Republican nomination for the state senate in a four-way race against Nancy Barto, Ray Barnes, and Brad Buch.
I have emailed the Citizens Clean Elections Commission to offer them the opportunity to put forth a statement on this. I don't expect them to do so, but will publish their response if they send one.
Later...
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Wow. There are going to be a *lot* of primaries in AZ this year
Based on a quick perusal of the Secretary of State's webpage of candidates, which isn't necessarily final, depending on successful challenges to petition sigs (rare, but not unheard of) or successful write-in candidacies (rare to the point of being unheard of).
However, the primary ballots for all of the parties has pretty much taken shape, and there are some surprises.
Quick takes on some of the aforementioned primaries -
- Democratic, US Senate - Five weeks ago, Rodney Glassman looked like a shoo-in, as he was the only active D candidate (Rudy Garcia had formed a committee, but that may have been the high point of his campaign, as he didn't even file sigs.) Then John McCain started looking very vulnerable against JD Hayworth, and suddenly there were three other D candidates gathering signatures, and they all filed - Cathy Eden, Randy Parraz, and John Dougherty all submitted sigs.
For now, Glassman remains the favorite because he has had feet on the ground for months, but that hardly assures his victory.
- Republican, CD1, U.S. Congress - Nine, count 'em NINE, Republicans are running for the chance to oppose incumbent Democrat Ann Kirkpatrick. I've got no idea who will come out of the primary here, but the most familiar names are Sydney Hay, the mining industry lobbyist who was the R nominee in 2008 and former legislator Rusty Bowers.
- Republican, CD3, U.S. Congress - There are TEN Republicans who filed sigs in this race to replace the soon-to-be retired John Shadegg. If any of them receive over 30% of the vote, it will be considered a landslide victory. Democrat Jon Hulburd awaits the winner of what is expected to be a brutal primary campaign.
- Republican, CD5, U.S. Congress - A mere six Rs have filed sigs in this race to face Democratic incumbent Harry Mitchell in November. This one will probably come down to David Schweikert and Susan Bitter Smith, like it did in 2008.
- Republican, CD7, U.S. Congress - Five (huh?) Rs have filed to go up against Democratic incumbent Raul Grijalva. I'm not sure why. I'm sure I don't care.
- Republican, CD8, U.S. Congress - Five Republicans have filed to challenge Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. The highest profile R candidate here is former state senator Jonathan Paton, a supporter of SB1070 and the payday loan industry.
- Libertarian, Governor - Everyone has been aware of the primary on the R side of the ballot (six filed sigs, with unelected incumbent Jan Brewer as the current favorite), but FOUR Libertarians have filed. ????
- There are primaries on one or both sides of the ballot for most of the statewide offices. Nothing unexpected though, so I'll cover those in a later post.
- The same with state lege, though I will mention a few of the more interesting ones here -
- Republican, LD5, State Senate - Sen. Sylvia Allen and Rep. Bill Konopnicki are going at it here. Allen is a darling of the flat Earth/Tea Party contingent; Konopnicki would be considered a right wing whackaloon almost anywhere else, but since he actually proposes a few decent, "good government" pieces of legislation each session in the House, he is considered a RINO (Republican in name only). No idea who will win this one.
- Democratic, LD13, State Senate - Former state representative Steve Gallardo is challenging incumbent Martha Garcia. Don't know the district or either candidate personally so I don't have a clue about this one.
- Republican, LD30, State Senate - Appointed incumbent Frank Antenori and former legislator Marian McClure face off here in what could challenge LD5 for primary of the year (legislative edition). Antenori is a part of the southern AZ contingent of hardcore nativists/Tea Party types in the lege and has a tendency to spout off threateningly to the Board of Supes, media, other legislators, or anyone who crosses him. McClure is overwhelmingly conservative, but civil and thoughtful.
She could be electoral roadkill this year.
- In Maricopa County, the biggest race will be the R race to serve out the last two years of Andrew Thomas' term as County Attorney. He resigned to pursue the greener pastures of the state Attorney General's race.
Three Republicans have filed - Boyd Dunn, mayor of Chandler, Bill Montgomery, 2006 R nominee for AZAG, and Rick Romley, former CA and current interim CA. I expect it will come down to Romley (anti-Arpaio) and Montgomery (pro-Arpaio) but those two could slice each up enough to give Dunn a shot at this one.
More this weekend when I have time to go into more depth on a couple of the races...
-
However, the primary ballots for all of the parties has pretty much taken shape, and there are some surprises.
Quick takes on some of the aforementioned primaries -
- Democratic, US Senate - Five weeks ago, Rodney Glassman looked like a shoo-in, as he was the only active D candidate (Rudy Garcia had formed a committee, but that may have been the high point of his campaign, as he didn't even file sigs.) Then John McCain started looking very vulnerable against JD Hayworth, and suddenly there were three other D candidates gathering signatures, and they all filed - Cathy Eden, Randy Parraz, and John Dougherty all submitted sigs.
For now, Glassman remains the favorite because he has had feet on the ground for months, but that hardly assures his victory.
- Republican, CD1, U.S. Congress - Nine, count 'em NINE, Republicans are running for the chance to oppose incumbent Democrat Ann Kirkpatrick. I've got no idea who will come out of the primary here, but the most familiar names are Sydney Hay, the mining industry lobbyist who was the R nominee in 2008 and former legislator Rusty Bowers.
- Republican, CD3, U.S. Congress - There are TEN Republicans who filed sigs in this race to replace the soon-to-be retired John Shadegg. If any of them receive over 30% of the vote, it will be considered a landslide victory. Democrat Jon Hulburd awaits the winner of what is expected to be a brutal primary campaign.
- Republican, CD5, U.S. Congress - A mere six Rs have filed sigs in this race to face Democratic incumbent Harry Mitchell in November. This one will probably come down to David Schweikert and Susan Bitter Smith, like it did in 2008.
- Republican, CD7, U.S. Congress - Five (huh?) Rs have filed to go up against Democratic incumbent Raul Grijalva. I'm not sure why. I'm sure I don't care.
- Republican, CD8, U.S. Congress - Five Republicans have filed to challenge Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. The highest profile R candidate here is former state senator Jonathan Paton, a supporter of SB1070 and the payday loan industry.
- Libertarian, Governor - Everyone has been aware of the primary on the R side of the ballot (six filed sigs, with unelected incumbent Jan Brewer as the current favorite), but FOUR Libertarians have filed. ????
- There are primaries on one or both sides of the ballot for most of the statewide offices. Nothing unexpected though, so I'll cover those in a later post.
- The same with state lege, though I will mention a few of the more interesting ones here -
- Republican, LD5, State Senate - Sen. Sylvia Allen and Rep. Bill Konopnicki are going at it here. Allen is a darling of the flat Earth/Tea Party contingent; Konopnicki would be considered a right wing whackaloon almost anywhere else, but since he actually proposes a few decent, "good government" pieces of legislation each session in the House, he is considered a RINO (Republican in name only). No idea who will win this one.
- Democratic, LD13, State Senate - Former state representative Steve Gallardo is challenging incumbent Martha Garcia. Don't know the district or either candidate personally so I don't have a clue about this one.
- Republican, LD30, State Senate - Appointed incumbent Frank Antenori and former legislator Marian McClure face off here in what could challenge LD5 for primary of the year (legislative edition). Antenori is a part of the southern AZ contingent of hardcore nativists/Tea Party types in the lege and has a tendency to spout off threateningly to the Board of Supes, media, other legislators, or anyone who crosses him. McClure is overwhelmingly conservative, but civil and thoughtful.
She could be electoral roadkill this year.
- In Maricopa County, the biggest race will be the R race to serve out the last two years of Andrew Thomas' term as County Attorney. He resigned to pursue the greener pastures of the state Attorney General's race.
Three Republicans have filed - Boyd Dunn, mayor of Chandler, Bill Montgomery, 2006 R nominee for AZAG, and Rick Romley, former CA and current interim CA. I expect it will come down to Romley (anti-Arpaio) and Montgomery (pro-Arpaio) but those two could slice each up enough to give Dunn a shot at this one.
More this weekend when I have time to go into more depth on a couple of the races...
-
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Sad day in Scottsdale
From guest writer John Washington, on his friend Tony Nelssen -
Good night...
On a bright, clear morning in Scottsdale that was so dry the desert sky couldn’t conjure up a cloud—let alone a tear—a giant has fallen. Councilman Tony Nelssen passed away at his home this morning, after a brief and valiant battle with cancer. Even after Tony told us about his diagnosis, I could not bring myself to believe it was possible he might not survive. It is difficult to imagine Scottsdale without Tony.
If anyone deserved the description “larger than life,” it was Tony. Had he lived a thousand years ago, he would have been a Viking warrior. Tony was a big man, but because of his quiet presence you would never know that if you had not stood next to him or shaken his hand. That stoic Scandinavian nature did not incline him to talk of how he suffered with arthritis in the last few years, nor the pain of his disease for the last few weeks.
Always a voice for the residents and the natural beauty of our community, Tony fought for us for twenty-five years. With almost a century-and-a-half of family history in the Valley, Tony’s legacy knowledge of this area was unmatched and irreplaceable. Tony never sought fame or personal gain from his position. He sacrificed thousands of hours of his time to try to keep Scottsdale special.
Tony also worked tirelessly to help others see what he valued. As a photographer, Tony tried to capture the essence and beauty of our community to share with those who could not experience it directly, and for those who might have otherwise missed it. As a photography instructor, he tried to help each student interpret that beauty in their own way.
Tony’s family was with him this morning, along with two childhood friends who’d come to help during Tony’s convalescence. Tony’s wife Marg, son Ian, and daughter Hannah are grateful for all your support over the years, and during this trying time.I miss my friend. Adios, Tony.
Arrangements are pending.
John Washington
Good night...
Tony Nelssen, Scottsdale City Councilman, passes away
From a press release on the City of Scottsdale's website -
Councilman Tony Nelssen passes away
The City of Scottsdale is deeply saddened by the passing of Councilman Tony Nelssen on Wednesday, May 26, and extends its sincere condolences and deepest sympathy to the Nelssen family. “This is a great loss for Scottsdale,” said Mayor Jim Lane. “Tony Nelssen was a passionate and dedicated citizen who was truly devoted to improving our community. He was a great colleague and friend, and he will be missed greatly.”Councilman Nelssen began his service on the Scottsdale City Council in June 2006. He was active in civic affairs for more than two decades prior, serving on a variety of city commissions and advisory groups, as well as neighborhood and civic associations.
In 1996 he founded The Great Sonoran, a group advocating innovative, site specific and climate sensitive architecture suited to the Sonoran Desert. Scottsdale derived much of its sensitive design guidelines from those developed by The Great Sonoran.
He was a member of the Scottsdale Planning Commission for two and one half years, and the city’s Parks and Recreation Commission for six years. On the state level, Councilman Nelssen was a member of the Arizona State Heritage Fund Public Advisory Committee.Tony Nelssen was a strong equestrian advocate who was named Horse Hero of the year in 2002 in the Town of Cave Creek. Nelssen also taught computer graphics and digital photography at Paradise Valley Community College, and had taught courses at Arizona State University, Phoenix College and Scottsdale Community College.
He is survived by his wife Marg, son Ian and daughter Hannah.
In lieu of flowers, the family requests donations to the Scottsdale Police Department’s Mounted Unit in Councilman Nelssen’s name. Donations may be made payable to the Scottsdale Police Department Mounted Unit and mailed to police headquarters at 8401 E. Indian School Road, Scottsdale, AZ, 85251.
I barely knew Councilman Nelssen, having met him only once or twice. While we were almost never in agreement politically, no one who met him could ever question his deep love for Scottsdale.
My condolences go out to Tony Nelssen's family and many friends.
Arizona Republic news coverage here; memorials from AZRep columnist Laurie Roberts here and AZRep editorial writer Cindy Hernandez here.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Signature deadline tomorrow in AZ
As nominating petition season draws to a close, most campaigns have submitted their sigs already or have made plans to do so tomorrow before the close of business. A few, such as University Lakes JP John Ore, have announced their retirement.
Note: Ore gained some notoriety late last year after he was outed as the judge who signed a batch of search warrants for Joe Arpaio as part of Arpaio's jihad against other county officials.
Normally, the Maricopa County Recorder's Office and the Arizona Secretary of State update their websites to indicate which candidates have submitted their petitions at the end of the business day, but they haven't done so as of this writing (the SOS' page is here; the link to Maricopa County's is here).
Through yesterday however, there weren't any serious surprises - there are seven R candidates with submitted petitions in CD1, five Rs in CD3, six Rs for LD8 State Rep, five Ds for LD27 State Rep, five Ds for LD28 State Rep, and all still counting. Given the rancor that has suffused politics at all levels in recent months, the number of people interested is somewhat surprising, but then, the number of people who want to change things isn't.
A bigger surprise is the number of independent candidates running so far - Harley Meyer in CD7, Ted Downing and Dave Ewoldt for LD28 State Senate (2?!?) and Gene Chewning for LD27 State Rep.
There must be something in Tucson's water. :)
OK...I've taken so long writing this post, the SOS' office has updated its website.
Turns out I was wrong a few weeks ago when I predicted that none of the late entries into the race for the D nomination for U.S. Senate would make it on to the ballot - both Cathy Eden and John Dougherty submitted their sigs today. In addition, there are now 8 Rs running in CD1; 8 Rs in CD3; 5 Rs in CD5; 4 Rs in CD7; 3 (count 'em, 3!) Libertarians running for Governor; 6 Rs for LD7 State Rep.; 5 Rs for LD22 State Rep.; 6 Ds for LD27 State Rep.
I'll do a more complete post once things are finalized. And once Maricopa County updates its website.
Later....
Note: Ore gained some notoriety late last year after he was outed as the judge who signed a batch of search warrants for Joe Arpaio as part of Arpaio's jihad against other county officials.
Normally, the Maricopa County Recorder's Office and the Arizona Secretary of State update their websites to indicate which candidates have submitted their petitions at the end of the business day, but they haven't done so as of this writing (the SOS' page is here; the link to Maricopa County's is here).
Through yesterday however, there weren't any serious surprises - there are seven R candidates with submitted petitions in CD1, five Rs in CD3, six Rs for LD8 State Rep, five Ds for LD27 State Rep, five Ds for LD28 State Rep, and all still counting. Given the rancor that has suffused politics at all levels in recent months, the number of people interested is somewhat surprising, but then, the number of people who want to change things isn't.
A bigger surprise is the number of independent candidates running so far - Harley Meyer in CD7, Ted Downing and Dave Ewoldt for LD28 State Senate (2?!?) and Gene Chewning for LD27 State Rep.
There must be something in Tucson's water. :)
OK...I've taken so long writing this post, the SOS' office has updated its website.
Turns out I was wrong a few weeks ago when I predicted that none of the late entries into the race for the D nomination for U.S. Senate would make it on to the ballot - both Cathy Eden and John Dougherty submitted their sigs today. In addition, there are now 8 Rs running in CD1; 8 Rs in CD3; 5 Rs in CD5; 4 Rs in CD7; 3 (count 'em, 3!) Libertarians running for Governor; 6 Rs for LD7 State Rep.; 5 Rs for LD22 State Rep.; 6 Ds for LD27 State Rep.
I'll do a more complete post once things are finalized. And once Maricopa County updates its website.
Later....
Monday, May 24, 2010
That didn't take long: R candidate "decertified" by Clean Elections
A Republican candidate for the Arizona Legislature from LD7 has run afoul of Clean Elections and his name is *not* David Burnell Smith.
From the Arizona Capitol Times (subscription and login required) -
Now, this decertification doesn't kick Green off of the ballot, it just affects his campaign financing.
Of course, given that Green submitted his nominating petitions on March 8th, weeks before anyone else, my guess is that a few of the other candidates in the R primary are busy at work, checking to see if Green cut a few corners there, too. They'll verify if Green submitted enough valid sigs to be on the primary ballot (submitted: 570; required: 482; difference: 88).
I understand that the typical AZ Republican despises even the mere idea of Clean Elections, but if a candidate (D, R, or whatever) wants to take CE funding, he or she has to follow the rules associated with running a Clean campaign. Period.
From the Arizona Capitol Times (subscription and login required) -
The Citizens Clean Elections Commission decertified a Senate candidate after finding that dozens of his $5 contribution forms had been allegedly forged. The commission voted at its May 20 meeting to decertify Robert Green and fine him $20,000.The agenda for that meeting is here.
Now, this decertification doesn't kick Green off of the ballot, it just affects his campaign financing.
Of course, given that Green submitted his nominating petitions on March 8th, weeks before anyone else, my guess is that a few of the other candidates in the R primary are busy at work, checking to see if Green cut a few corners there, too. They'll verify if Green submitted enough valid sigs to be on the primary ballot (submitted: 570; required: 482; difference: 88).
I understand that the typical AZ Republican despises even the mere idea of Clean Elections, but if a candidate (D, R, or whatever) wants to take CE funding, he or she has to follow the rules associated with running a Clean campaign. Period.
JD Hayworth, channelling his inner John Belushi
I had resolved not to pay much attention to the brouhaha among the Republicans over the Senate seat. Whether their eventual nominee is John McCain or JD Hayworth, Rodney Glassman is a far better choice to represent Arizona in the United States Senate.
However, this one is too good to pass up.
:)
Last week, Hayworth spoke to a group of Republicans, and started expounding on history. Specifically, he claimed that the U.S. never declared war against Nazi Germany.
Now, perhaps I am being too hard on good ol' JD. He's hardly the first famous person to get WW2 history wrong.
When John Belushi spoke about Germany "bombing Pearl Harbor" and when JD spoke about the US never declaring war on Nazi Germany, neither one was citing facts.
The difference being that when Belushi spoke, was just acting. Hayworth actually believes what he spouted.
Of course, they do have one thing in common - whether we are talking about Belushi's classic bit in Animal House or Hayworth's pontifications, hearty laughter is the result.
The McCain campaign may be learning the same lesson that Harry Mitchell learned in 2006 when he defeated Hayworth - the best way to beat JD is to let him be himself.
BTW - to anyone who may be thinking that Hayworth was correct - after an address by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Congress declared war on Japan on December 8, 1941, which was followed by Germany and Italy declaring war on the U.S., which was then followed by the U.S. declaring war on Germany and Italy on December 11, 1941.
However, this one is too good to pass up.
:)
Last week, Hayworth spoke to a group of Republicans, and started expounding on history. Specifically, he claimed that the U.S. never declared war against Nazi Germany.
Now, perhaps I am being too hard on good ol' JD. He's hardly the first famous person to get WW2 history wrong.
When John Belushi spoke about Germany "bombing Pearl Harbor" and when JD spoke about the US never declaring war on Nazi Germany, neither one was citing facts.
The difference being that when Belushi spoke, was just acting. Hayworth actually believes what he spouted.
Of course, they do have one thing in common - whether we are talking about Belushi's classic bit in Animal House or Hayworth's pontifications, hearty laughter is the result.
The McCain campaign may be learning the same lesson that Harry Mitchell learned in 2006 when he defeated Hayworth - the best way to beat JD is to let him be himself.
BTW - to anyone who may be thinking that Hayworth was correct - after an address by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Congress declared war on Japan on December 8, 1941, which was followed by Germany and Italy declaring war on the U.S., which was then followed by the U.S. declaring war on Germany and Italy on December 11, 1941.
Arizona's STO/Tax Credit Law Headed To The Supreme Court
It might surprise some observers that Arizona's school tuition tax credit law made it to the Supreme Court before Arizona's police-state anti-immigrant law, but the STO law has been around for better than a decade while the immigration law has been on the books for less than a month.
From Education Week -
The STO law has been the subject of scrutiny in recent months, as two competing legislative committees held hearings on the law.
One, chaired by State Rep. David Schapira, heard testimony from people like NAU professor Larry Mohrweis on the almost total lack of transparency and oversight of STOs and their use of redirected tax revenues.
The other committee was an expensive rubber stamp created by House Speaker Kirk Adams for the purpose of expanding the law while shielding the STOs from serious oversight, including the largest STO in the state, which just happens to be run by a fellow Republican legislator (Steve Yarbrough).
Guess which committee's recommendations were embraced by the R majority in the lege?
But I digress... :)
The case will be heard during the next session of the Court.
SCOTUSBlog has coverage here, including links to petitions, briefs, and opinions in the case.
From Education Week -
The U.S. Supreme Court today agreed to weigh the constitutionality of a 13-year-old Arizona program offering tax credits for donations made to organizations that provide scholarships for children to attend private schools.
A federal appeals court ruled last year that Arizona's tax credit program impermissibly advances religion in violation of the First Amendment's prohibition against any government establishment of religion. It found that the majority of those scholarships go to students attending religious schools, and that some of the "school tuition organizations," or STOs, restrict their scholarships to that purpose.
The STO law has been the subject of scrutiny in recent months, as two competing legislative committees held hearings on the law.
One, chaired by State Rep. David Schapira, heard testimony from people like NAU professor Larry Mohrweis on the almost total lack of transparency and oversight of STOs and their use of redirected tax revenues.
The other committee was an expensive rubber stamp created by House Speaker Kirk Adams for the purpose of expanding the law while shielding the STOs from serious oversight, including the largest STO in the state, which just happens to be run by a fellow Republican legislator (Steve Yarbrough).
Guess which committee's recommendations were embraced by the R majority in the lege?
But I digress... :)
The case will be heard during the next session of the Court.
SCOTUSBlog has coverage here, including links to petitions, briefs, and opinions in the case.
Sunday, May 23, 2010
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.
These schedule posts have become intermittent, due in part to the lack of interesting tidbits to cover, as well as election year deadlines in Arizona (sigs are due Wednesday!) cutting into available blogging time. However, this week, there will be a *lot* of budget-related action and other interesting matters up for consideration, especially in D.C. and with the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors.
Stuff that is definitely post-worthy.
On to the important stuff...
On the federal level -
- The U.S. House will be handling a number of bills this week as they get ready for the holiday break next week. The highlight this week will be H.R. 5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2011 (CRS summary here). There will be a massive amount of election-year posturing over this one, whether of the "fiscal responsibility" or the "I'm a patriot" variety. Still, it's only an authorization bill, not an appropriations bill, and they all will want to make the earliest possible flights out of town on Friday. The posturing will be loud, but efficient.
Also on the agenda: Consideration of a Senate amendment to H.R. 4213, the American Workers, State, and Business Relief Act of 2010 (most current CRS summary here); H.R. 5175, the DISCLOSE Act (CRS summary here - it's designed to limit corporate control of election campaigns); and further consideration of H.R. 5116, the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (previously blocked by the House GOP when the measure came to the House floor under "suspension of the rules," requiring a 2/3 majority to pass, it's coming back in a way that will require only a simple majority to pass).
- The U.S. Senate will be doing, you know, "Senate" stuff this week. That includes a committee schedule with hearings on the massive BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, impacts of consolidation on the airline industry, and more (lots of executive branch nominations). There will also be floor consideration of H.R. 4899, the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2010.
...Back here in Arizona -
- The Arizona Corporation Commission will be holding a public comment session in Prescott Valley on Tuesday. The subject will be
The Commission's regular hearing schedule is here.
- The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors has a busy and "colorful" week on tap.
-- Monday's Informal meeting is dedicated to budget matters, including the tentative adoption of next year's budget.
-- Later on Monday, the Supes will be holding a Special meeting dedicated to a financial review of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office. This one could include a contempt hearing over Sheriff Joe Arpaio's refusal to turn over financial records for the review. There is some question about the procedures for the contempt hearing, so the hearing schedule may yet be changed or be cancelled entirely. More AZ Republic coverage here. This one could be the most interesting event of the week, or it could fizzle completely.
- - On Wednesday, the Supes have a Formal meeting scheduled. The agenda is a long one.
- The Board of Directors of the Maricopa Integrated Health System will be holding an executive session on Monday (relating to legal matters and contracts - the agenda items are rather vague, intentionally so, I think) and a regular meeting on Wednesday (highlight: budget-related stuff). MIHS' Legislative summary will also be on the agenda. Like most of us, their primary focus is on the state's budget situation.
- The Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District is scheduled to meet on Tuesday, agenda here. It looks pretty mundane thus far, though there is an item to change the length of the terms of the Board President and Secretary from one to two years. After the regular meeting will be an executive session regarding employment of the Chancellor of the District, Rufus Glasper. There have been issues of contention between the Chancellor and certain board members, so this particular exec session could be one that most MCCCD observers wish was a public session. Look for public fallout from this meeting to reach an agenda in June.
- The City Councils of Tempe and Scottsdale aren't scheduled to hold regular meetings this week, though Tempe will hold a special meeting on Friday to accept the results from last week's election. Tempe's Council Calendar is here; Scottsdale's Community Meetings Notice is here.
Not scheduled to meet this week: Citizens Clean Elections Commission, Arizona Board of Regents, Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project
Later...
These schedule posts have become intermittent, due in part to the lack of interesting tidbits to cover, as well as election year deadlines in Arizona (sigs are due Wednesday!) cutting into available blogging time. However, this week, there will be a *lot* of budget-related action and other interesting matters up for consideration, especially in D.C. and with the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors.
Stuff that is definitely post-worthy.
On to the important stuff...
On the federal level -
- The U.S. House will be handling a number of bills this week as they get ready for the holiday break next week. The highlight this week will be H.R. 5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2011 (CRS summary here). There will be a massive amount of election-year posturing over this one, whether of the "fiscal responsibility" or the "I'm a patriot" variety. Still, it's only an authorization bill, not an appropriations bill, and they all will want to make the earliest possible flights out of town on Friday. The posturing will be loud, but efficient.
Also on the agenda: Consideration of a Senate amendment to H.R. 4213, the American Workers, State, and Business Relief Act of 2010 (most current CRS summary here); H.R. 5175, the DISCLOSE Act (CRS summary here - it's designed to limit corporate control of election campaigns); and further consideration of H.R. 5116, the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (previously blocked by the House GOP when the measure came to the House floor under "suspension of the rules," requiring a 2/3 majority to pass, it's coming back in a way that will require only a simple majority to pass).
- The U.S. Senate will be doing, you know, "Senate" stuff this week. That includes a committee schedule with hearings on the massive BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, impacts of consolidation on the airline industry, and more (lots of executive branch nominations). There will also be floor consideration of H.R. 4899, the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2010.
...Back here in Arizona -
- The Arizona Corporation Commission will be holding a public comment session in Prescott Valley on Tuesday. The subject will be
Public Comment in the Matter of the Application of the Commission’s, Docket No. E-00000J-10-0044, inquiry and potential rulemaking regarding line extension policies of electric utilities, including but not limited to, alternative rate designs related to apportionment and rate recovery of cost of construction and installation of electric utility line extensions, the use of free footage and/or dollar allowances in line extension tariffs, the treatment of proceeds associated with line extensions as contributions in aid of construction (CIAC) and/or revenue, and the ability for third-party vendors to contract to install line extensions for electric utilities.The ACC will be holding a regular "Utilities" meeting on Wednesday and Thursday, agenda here.
The Commission's regular hearing schedule is here.
- The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors has a busy and "colorful" week on tap.
-- Monday's Informal meeting is dedicated to budget matters, including the tentative adoption of next year's budget.
-- Later on Monday, the Supes will be holding a Special meeting dedicated to a financial review of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office. This one could include a contempt hearing over Sheriff Joe Arpaio's refusal to turn over financial records for the review. There is some question about the procedures for the contempt hearing, so the hearing schedule may yet be changed or be cancelled entirely. More AZ Republic coverage here. This one could be the most interesting event of the week, or it could fizzle completely.
- - On Wednesday, the Supes have a Formal meeting scheduled. The agenda is a long one.
- The Board of Directors of the Maricopa Integrated Health System will be holding an executive session on Monday (relating to legal matters and contracts - the agenda items are rather vague, intentionally so, I think) and a regular meeting on Wednesday (highlight: budget-related stuff). MIHS' Legislative summary will also be on the agenda. Like most of us, their primary focus is on the state's budget situation.
- The Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District is scheduled to meet on Tuesday, agenda here. It looks pretty mundane thus far, though there is an item to change the length of the terms of the Board President and Secretary from one to two years. After the regular meeting will be an executive session regarding employment of the Chancellor of the District, Rufus Glasper. There have been issues of contention between the Chancellor and certain board members, so this particular exec session could be one that most MCCCD observers wish was a public session. Look for public fallout from this meeting to reach an agenda in June.
- The City Councils of Tempe and Scottsdale aren't scheduled to hold regular meetings this week, though Tempe will hold a special meeting on Friday to accept the results from last week's election. Tempe's Council Calendar is here; Scottsdale's Community Meetings Notice is here.
Not scheduled to meet this week: Citizens Clean Elections Commission, Arizona Board of Regents, Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project
Later...
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Dark Clouds, Silver Linings, and Lessons
The results of Tuesday's elections across the country offer a silver lining of hope in what has long been considered to be a dark year for Democrats. And nowhere is that silver lining brighter than in Arizona.
To whit:
- Dark cloud: Libertarian (dressed in Republican clothing) Rand Paul wins the R nomination for Senate in Kentucky.
- Silver lining: He's already imploding, coming out against the Civil Rights Act...before backing off (sort of). Guess he was against the Act before he was for it.
- Silver lining2 - Paul received 206,960 votes in the R primary; Daniel Mongiardo, the 2nd place Democrat in the D primary, received 225,159. There are almost 600K more Ds than Rs in Kentucky. They are Ds of a conservative bent (hence the two Rs currently representing KY in the U.S. Senate) but they won't put up with the public embarrassment that Paul is threatening to become.
- Lesson: The most "whatever" candidate in a party's primary may not be that party's *best* candidate. Not making a prediction here (yet), but despite the Tea Party's glee over Paul's nomination, winning the nomination isn't the same as winning the office. This race is far from over. The Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in KY, Jack Conway, is in a solid position entering the general election campaign.
- (Not so) Dark cloud: Democrat Mark Critz won the special election in Pennsylvania's 12th Congressional District. The win keeps the Ds' perfect record in head-to-head special elections held since the 2008 election intact and allows them to retain the seat held by the late Jack Murtha for the better part of four decades.
- Silver lining: Critz may have shown the way to beat the Rs' standard campaign platform of running against D.C., Nancy Pelosi, and those durn "liberal" Democrats, and it's the most basic lesson in politics - all politics is local. The R in the race, Tim Burns, ran as a generic national Republican/Club for Growth candidate, campaigning against Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi. Critz stumped the western PA district and talked about jobs.
Critz won.
- Lesson: No matter if the pundits think that the trends in a given election cycle dramatically favor one party over another (as they think that 2010 favors Rs over Ds), any single race is usually won by the candidate who runs the better, more district-focused, campaign.
- Dark cloud: Republicans all over Arizona are grasping for the chance to go Congress.
- Silver lining: Their primaries have become cattle call, "I'm more conservative than thou" slugfests.
- - In the race for U.S. Senate, former radio gabber JD Hayworth is looking to unseat fellow Republican John McCain, pulling the heretofore not-exactly-liberal McCain into Hayworth's (and the Tea Party's) nativist, anti-government ideological territory.
All the while, Democrat Rodney Glassman is turning in his sigs, opening his Phoenix headquarters, and reaching out to *all* Arizona voters, not just the nativists.
- - In CD5, Republican perennial candidates Susan Bitter Smith and David Schweikert have been joined by electoral newcomers Jim Ward and Chris Salvino in their race to unseat Democratic incumbent and local icon Harry Mitchell. The Rs are running anti-immigrant/anti-Obama campaigns (Salvino's signs even start with "Stop Obama", not his name). Mitchell is working for his district, reining in Congressional pay, and protecting America's veterans.
-- In the CD3 battle royal to replace the soon-to-be retired John Shadegg, there are at least a dozen open committees on the Republican side (Moak, Waring, Winkler, and Quayle have already filed their signatures) and they're all running as the "real" conservative in the race. They've been whipsawing between toeing the nativist line and nuzzling the corporate teat.
All the while, Jon Hulburd, the only Democrat in the race already in general election mode, talking to voters in the district and honing his message, starting with his number one issue, jobs.
-- In CD8, at least three Republicans, including SB1070 and payday loan industry supporter Jonathan Paton, are duking it out for a chance to face incumbent Democrat Gabrielle Giffords (D-Tucson). Paton, the presumed R nominee, has been spending time in Phoenix, far from his district, holding a $1000 per person fundraiser at an Arizona Diamondbacks game; Giffords countered with an event held much closer to home - Hi Corbett Field in Tucson at a Tucson Toros game.
- Lesson: We'll see in November. I might be mistaken about where this is all leading, but the Ds are doing things right while their erstwhile R challengers are trying to stick political knives in each other's backs and making the rounds of the usual suspects, hoping to schmooze them into opening their wallets.
Later...
To whit:
- Dark cloud: Libertarian (dressed in Republican clothing) Rand Paul wins the R nomination for Senate in Kentucky.
- Silver lining: He's already imploding, coming out against the Civil Rights Act...before backing off (sort of). Guess he was against the Act before he was for it.
- Silver lining2 - Paul received 206,960 votes in the R primary; Daniel Mongiardo, the 2nd place Democrat in the D primary, received 225,159. There are almost 600K more Ds than Rs in Kentucky. They are Ds of a conservative bent (hence the two Rs currently representing KY in the U.S. Senate) but they won't put up with the public embarrassment that Paul is threatening to become.
- Lesson: The most "whatever" candidate in a party's primary may not be that party's *best* candidate. Not making a prediction here (yet), but despite the Tea Party's glee over Paul's nomination, winning the nomination isn't the same as winning the office. This race is far from over. The Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in KY, Jack Conway, is in a solid position entering the general election campaign.
- (Not so) Dark cloud: Democrat Mark Critz won the special election in Pennsylvania's 12th Congressional District. The win keeps the Ds' perfect record in head-to-head special elections held since the 2008 election intact and allows them to retain the seat held by the late Jack Murtha for the better part of four decades.
- Silver lining: Critz may have shown the way to beat the Rs' standard campaign platform of running against D.C., Nancy Pelosi, and those durn "liberal" Democrats, and it's the most basic lesson in politics - all politics is local. The R in the race, Tim Burns, ran as a generic national Republican/Club for Growth candidate, campaigning against Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi. Critz stumped the western PA district and talked about jobs.
Critz won.
- Lesson: No matter if the pundits think that the trends in a given election cycle dramatically favor one party over another (as they think that 2010 favors Rs over Ds), any single race is usually won by the candidate who runs the better, more district-focused, campaign.
- Dark cloud: Republicans all over Arizona are grasping for the chance to go Congress.
- Silver lining: Their primaries have become cattle call, "I'm more conservative than thou" slugfests.
- - In the race for U.S. Senate, former radio gabber JD Hayworth is looking to unseat fellow Republican John McCain, pulling the heretofore not-exactly-liberal McCain into Hayworth's (and the Tea Party's) nativist, anti-government ideological territory.
All the while, Democrat Rodney Glassman is turning in his sigs, opening his Phoenix headquarters, and reaching out to *all* Arizona voters, not just the nativists.
- - In CD5, Republican perennial candidates Susan Bitter Smith and David Schweikert have been joined by electoral newcomers Jim Ward and Chris Salvino in their race to unseat Democratic incumbent and local icon Harry Mitchell. The Rs are running anti-immigrant/anti-Obama campaigns (Salvino's signs even start with "Stop Obama", not his name). Mitchell is working for his district, reining in Congressional pay, and protecting America's veterans.
-- In the CD3 battle royal to replace the soon-to-be retired John Shadegg, there are at least a dozen open committees on the Republican side (Moak, Waring, Winkler, and Quayle have already filed their signatures) and they're all running as the "real" conservative in the race. They've been whipsawing between toeing the nativist line and nuzzling the corporate teat.
All the while, Jon Hulburd, the only Democrat in the race already in general election mode, talking to voters in the district and honing his message, starting with his number one issue, jobs.
-- In CD8, at least three Republicans, including SB1070 and payday loan industry supporter Jonathan Paton, are duking it out for a chance to face incumbent Democrat Gabrielle Giffords (D-Tucson). Paton, the presumed R nominee, has been spending time in Phoenix, far from his district, holding a $1000 per person fundraiser at an Arizona Diamondbacks game; Giffords countered with an event held much closer to home - Hi Corbett Field in Tucson at a Tucson Toros game.
- Lesson: We'll see in November. I might be mistaken about where this is all leading, but the Ds are doing things right while their erstwhile R challengers are trying to stick political knives in each other's backs and making the rounds of the usual suspects, hoping to schmooze them into opening their wallets.
Later...
Friday, May 21, 2010
Federal court upholds Clean Elections matching funds
From a Howard Fischer story in the AZ Daily Star -
The filers of the suit said that the matching funds provisions of Clean elections infringed on their free speech rights.
I say that the provision only infringes on their abilities to buy elections, something that is *not* protected under the U.S. Constitution.
For the first time in a long time, common sense won out in a matter related to Arizona. Enjoy the moment...
Arizona laws which give matching dollars to publicly financed candidates for office when their privately funded foes spend more are legal, a federal appeals court ruled today.
In a unanimous decision, the three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected claims by challengers - including the state treasurer and several legislators - that the provision of the voter-approved financing scheme violates their First Amendment rights. The challengers, all of whom ran with private donations, said it's wrong for the state to give more money to their political foes just because they have more cash.
Today's ruling overturns the conclusion of U.S. District Court Judge Roslyn Silver who had voided the law.
The filers of the suit said that the matching funds provisions of Clean elections infringed on their free speech rights.
I say that the provision only infringes on their abilities to buy elections, something that is *not* protected under the U.S. Constitution.
For the first time in a long time, common sense won out in a matter related to Arizona. Enjoy the moment...
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Prop 100 passing...
The results aren't finalized yet, but with 84% of the polling places reporting, support for the temporary 1% increase in the state's sales tax is outpacing opposition by nearly 300,000 votes.
Governor Jan Brewer has pledged that the revenue from the tax increase won't go toward tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, but there is still a persistent rumor that there will a special session for a new "jobs bill."
This isn't over, and won't be until the composition of the legislature is changed in November.
Governor Jan Brewer has pledged that the revenue from the tax increase won't go toward tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, but there is still a persistent rumor that there will a special session for a new "jobs bill."
This isn't over, and won't be until the composition of the legislature is changed in November.
Len Copple, former Tempe City Councilman and community activist, passes away
Picture courtesy the website of the City of Tempe's website
.
From the City of Tempe press release -
For instance, after Woods' first run at a council seat in 2006, Copple volunteered to help first-time candidate Woods take down his campaign signs. After that, they were fast friends. They remained so even after Copple left politics behind, frequently meeting at Pier 54 in Tempe for lunch. There, Copple would often serve as a confidante and sounding board.
An emotional Woods observed "the entire community will miss him."
Expect more tributes to Copple in the coming days.
My condolences go out to Copple's family and friends on their loss.
.From the City of Tempe press release -
Former Tempe City Councilmember Leonard (Len) Copple, 68, passed away early Monday morning after a courageous battle with acute lymphocytic leukemia. What will be long remembered are the decades of service, the wit and the character of the man behind what some call the city’s “velvet voice.”From the AZ Republic story on Copple's passing -
Copple, a retired Tempe lawyer, served two terms on the Tempe City Council, from 1998 to 2006. In 1994, he was appointed to serve a six-month Council term for Don Cassano, who resigned to run for Mayor. Copple served on the city’s Planning and Zoning commission from 1984 to 1989. For many years, his commanding voice could be heard on the city of Tempe’s on-hold messaging system describing various community amenities and services. Copple’s family said Monday that he was perhaps most proud of his role in bringing light rail and the P.F. Chang’s Rock ‘N’ Roll Marathon to Tempe.
Tempe Community Council (TCC) named Copple a “Tempe Treasure,” as he had been nominated many times for that organization’s Don Carlos Humanitarian Award. He was the front desk receptionist for TCC’s Earned Income Tax Credit program for eight of the last nine years. Copple also had many years of involvement with Tempe Sister Cities and other community organizations.
“Len was not only a voice for those without; he was fiercely dedicated to improving Tempe through his charitable volunteer work,” said TCC Executive Director Kate Hanley. “He was a friend to everyone he met.”
Services will be 1 p.m. Sunday, May 23, at Mission del Sol Presbyterian Church, 1565 E. Warner Rd., in Tempe.
Copple is survived by his wife, Jean, three children, six grandchildren and a brother. The family asks that donations be made to the Friends of the Tempe Center for the Arts (700 W. Rio Salado Parkway, Tempe, 85281) or to the Leukemia andLymphoma Society (http://pages.teamintraining.org/dm/rnr10/cathyswann).
Councilman Ben Arredondo served with Copple on the Tempe City Council during Copple's terms from 1998 to 2006.In a phone conversation, Corey Woods, a current member of the Tempe City Council spoke of Copple's kindness both toward the community (which has been well documented), and toward individuals.
Copple was a stellar example of what a civic leader should be, Arredondo said.
"I thought Leonard was one of the most honorable persons I've served with. He stood by his convictions," Arredondo said. "I think that the two things he'll be remembered for are his honesty and his honorable intentions. That's what it takes to be a strong politician that people respect."
For instance, after Woods' first run at a council seat in 2006, Copple volunteered to help first-time candidate Woods take down his campaign signs. After that, they were fast friends. They remained so even after Copple left politics behind, frequently meeting at Pier 54 in Tempe for lunch. There, Copple would often serve as a confidante and sounding board.
An emotional Woods observed "the entire community will miss him."
Expect more tributes to Copple in the coming days.
My condolences go out to Copple's family and friends on their loss.
McCain/Hayworth isn't the only colorful Senate race this year
...of course, given that we live in Arizona, McCain v. Hayworth is the one we've heard the most about.
Not a good day for incumbents and "establishment" candidates in either major party.
...In Kentucky, in a development that is certain to gladden the hearts of Tea Party types, Rand Paul (the son of Congressman Ron Paul) seems to have won the Republican primary in the Senate race there. The "establishment" GOP candidate there, Trey Grayson, had the support of most of the big names in the GOP, including Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell.
It didn't help Grayson, though Paul's victory may help the Democrats - Paul may be too extreme even for Kentucky's voters.
...In Pennsylvania, incumbent Democrat-turned-Republican-turned-Democrat again Senator Arlen Specter is facing a spirited challenge from Congressman Joe Sestak. While it's hard to consider a sitting Congressman to be an "outsider", Specter has been supported by President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Pennsylvania's Governor, Ed Rendell, and the party infrastructure. Sestak definitely qualifies as the outsider in this race.
Specter has lost the primary; now Joe Sestak will find out if it is an anti-incumbent wave sweeping the country, or an anti-Democrat.
...In Arkansas, incumbent Blanche Lincoln (D-Wal Mart) is being challenged by progressive Democratic Lieutenant Governor Bill Halter. She was favored to gain a plurality in today's primary, but under Arkansas law, she needed to gain a majority to avoid a run-off in early June. She didn't reach a majority, so a run-off will take place.
Her vulnerability seems to be over her wishy-washy stance on health care reform. She voted for the final HCR package, ticking off the Tea Party types, but was adamantly opposed to a public option (you know, *real* health care reform), ticking off the Democratic base and every Arkansan who is un- or under-insured.
Again, the party establishment (and Big Business) is supporting Lincoln (with Labor supporting Halter), and while she seems likely to win the nomination, grassroots disaffection with her may cost the Ds the seat in November.
...In other "colorful" elections developments, the presumed D nominee in Connecticut to replace the retiring Sen. Chris Dodd, current CT Attorney General Richard Blumenthal has been fighting allegations that he exaggerated his record of military service, saying that he had served in Vietnam when he had in fact only volunteered for the Marine Corps Reserve and had never actually been in Vietnam. He says that he "misspoke" and has apologized. It remains to be seen how this affects his candidacy.
The Connecticut Democrats will be holding a nominating convention this weekend. If another D candidate receives 15% of the vote, there will be a primary. Stay tuned on this one.
The next question, and we won't learn the answer until November, is whether tonight was an indication of a general anti-incumbent wave or if it was more the grassroots of each party flexing their muscles and knocking off candidates who weren't seen as "good" Democrats/Republicans.
Not a good day for incumbents and "establishment" candidates in either major party.
...In Kentucky, in a development that is certain to gladden the hearts of Tea Party types, Rand Paul (the son of Congressman Ron Paul) seems to have won the Republican primary in the Senate race there. The "establishment" GOP candidate there, Trey Grayson, had the support of most of the big names in the GOP, including Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell.
It didn't help Grayson, though Paul's victory may help the Democrats - Paul may be too extreme even for Kentucky's voters.
...In Pennsylvania, incumbent Democrat-turned-Republican-turned-Democrat again Senator Arlen Specter is facing a spirited challenge from Congressman Joe Sestak. While it's hard to consider a sitting Congressman to be an "outsider", Specter has been supported by President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Pennsylvania's Governor, Ed Rendell, and the party infrastructure. Sestak definitely qualifies as the outsider in this race.
Specter has lost the primary; now Joe Sestak will find out if it is an anti-incumbent wave sweeping the country, or an anti-Democrat.
...In Arkansas, incumbent Blanche Lincoln (D-Wal Mart) is being challenged by progressive Democratic Lieutenant Governor Bill Halter. She was favored to gain a plurality in today's primary, but under Arkansas law, she needed to gain a majority to avoid a run-off in early June. She didn't reach a majority, so a run-off will take place.
Her vulnerability seems to be over her wishy-washy stance on health care reform. She voted for the final HCR package, ticking off the Tea Party types, but was adamantly opposed to a public option (you know, *real* health care reform), ticking off the Democratic base and every Arkansan who is un- or under-insured.
Again, the party establishment (and Big Business) is supporting Lincoln (with Labor supporting Halter), and while she seems likely to win the nomination, grassroots disaffection with her may cost the Ds the seat in November.
...In other "colorful" elections developments, the presumed D nominee in Connecticut to replace the retiring Sen. Chris Dodd, current CT Attorney General Richard Blumenthal has been fighting allegations that he exaggerated his record of military service, saying that he had served in Vietnam when he had in fact only volunteered for the Marine Corps Reserve and had never actually been in Vietnam. He says that he "misspoke" and has apologized. It remains to be seen how this affects his candidacy.
The Connecticut Democrats will be holding a nominating convention this weekend. If another D candidate receives 15% of the vote, there will be a primary. Stay tuned on this one.
The next question, and we won't learn the answer until November, is whether tonight was an indication of a general anti-incumbent wave or if it was more the grassroots of each party flexing their muscles and knocking off candidates who weren't seen as "good" Democrats/Republicans.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Quick update - early signature filers
Nominating petitions aren't due until next Wednesday, but they are already rolling in across the Valley and across the state.
From a phone conversation with Carolyn Jagger, City Clerk of Scottsdale, the list of candidates for city council who have submitted their petitions already -
Joe Penalosa
Bob Littlefield (incumbent)
Tony Nelssen (incumbent)
Guy Phillips
Ned O'Hearn (former councilman)
Statewide and federal offices, courtesy the AZ Secretary of State's website,
U.S. Senate - Jim Deakin and J.D. Hayworth (both Rs)
U.S. Congress, CD1 - Bradley Beauchamp (R)
CD2 - Trent Franks (R)
CD3 - Steve Moak, Ed Winkler, Jim Waring (all Rs)
CD4 - Ed Pastor (D)
CD5 - Susan Bitter Smith and David Schweikert (Rs)
CD6 - Jeff Smith (R)
\
CD7 - Ruth McClung (R)
CD8 - Jesse Kelly (R)
Arizona Governor - Terry Goddard (D), Ron Cavanagh and Bruce Olsen (Ls), Jan Brewer, John Munger and Matthew Jette (Rs)
Arizona Secretary of State - Sam Wercinski (D) and Ken Bennett (R)
Arizona Attorney General - Felecia Rotellini (D), Tom Horne and Andrew Thomas (Rs)
Arizona Treasurer - Doug Ducey, Barbara Leff, and Thayer Verschoor (Rs)
Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction - Margaret Dugan and John Huppenthal (Rs)
Arizona Corporation Commission - David Bradley and Jorge Luis Garcia (Ds), Brenda Burns, Gary Pierce, and Barry Wong (Rs)
I've got an email out to the Maricopa County Elections Department inquiring after similar info for the county-wide offices up this time around (county attorney and the governing board of the Central Arizona Project), but they haven't replied as of this writing. I'll update when that info becomes available.
Later...
From a phone conversation with Carolyn Jagger, City Clerk of Scottsdale, the list of candidates for city council who have submitted their petitions already -
Joe Penalosa
Bob Littlefield (incumbent)
Tony Nelssen (incumbent)
Guy Phillips
Ned O'Hearn (former councilman)
Statewide and federal offices, courtesy the AZ Secretary of State's website,
U.S. Senate - Jim Deakin and J.D. Hayworth (both Rs)
U.S. Congress, CD1 - Bradley Beauchamp (R)
CD2 - Trent Franks (R)
CD3 - Steve Moak, Ed Winkler, Jim Waring (all Rs)
CD4 - Ed Pastor (D)
CD5 - Susan Bitter Smith and David Schweikert (Rs)
CD6 - Jeff Smith (R)
\
CD7 - Ruth McClung (R)
CD8 - Jesse Kelly (R)
Arizona Governor - Terry Goddard (D), Ron Cavanagh and Bruce Olsen (Ls), Jan Brewer, John Munger and Matthew Jette (Rs)
Arizona Secretary of State - Sam Wercinski (D) and Ken Bennett (R)
Arizona Attorney General - Felecia Rotellini (D), Tom Horne and Andrew Thomas (Rs)
Arizona Treasurer - Doug Ducey, Barbara Leff, and Thayer Verschoor (Rs)
Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction - Margaret Dugan and John Huppenthal (Rs)
Arizona Corporation Commission - David Bradley and Jorge Luis Garcia (Ds), Brenda Burns, Gary Pierce, and Barry Wong (Rs)
I've got an email out to the Maricopa County Elections Department inquiring after similar info for the county-wide offices up this time around (county attorney and the governing board of the Central Arizona Project), but they haven't replied as of this writing. I'll update when that info becomes available.
Later...
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Municipal budget time
Most of the state's political attention is on this week's special election to raise the state's sales tax by 1 percentage point or on the latest development in the Republican primary for U.S. Senate.
However, folks may want to start paying a little of that attention to matters closer to home.
Specifically, the municipal budget process.
Most cities and towns in AZ are finalizing their FY2011 budgets and are holding hearings to publicize their proposed revenues and expenditures for the coming year.
- On Tuesday in Scottsdale, the City Council will hold a public hearing on the budget proposal and proposed rates and fees during its regularly scheduled meeting (full agenda here). Also on the agenda: proposed changes to the City's charter to be offered for voter approval in November. Some interesting proposals here, but I'll cover those in a separate post closer to the election. The City's budget resource webpage is here.
- On Thursday and Friday, Tempe's City Council will be holding a number of mostly budget-related meetings.
After Thursday's regularly scheduled Council meeting (agenda for that here), they will be holding a meeting of the Rio Salado Community Facilities District Board to consider the tentative budget and assessments for the district.
On Friday, the Tempe City Council will be holding a budget workshop. The agenda for that includes discussion of "budget balancing" proposals for the City's Golf Fund, Performing Arts Fund, Transportation Fund, and Transit Fund (more layoffs coming, folks) and a discussion of the City's Capital Improvement Plan follow up.
Look for similar meetings in the other cities and towns in AZ shortly, if they haven't taken place already.
While the antics of the state legislature and governor garner more press (and notice from the likes of me), what our City Councils are doing has a far more direct impact on our day-to-day lives, and deserve at least as much attention.
However, folks may want to start paying a little of that attention to matters closer to home.
Specifically, the municipal budget process.
Most cities and towns in AZ are finalizing their FY2011 budgets and are holding hearings to publicize their proposed revenues and expenditures for the coming year.
- On Tuesday in Scottsdale, the City Council will hold a public hearing on the budget proposal and proposed rates and fees during its regularly scheduled meeting (full agenda here). Also on the agenda: proposed changes to the City's charter to be offered for voter approval in November. Some interesting proposals here, but I'll cover those in a separate post closer to the election. The City's budget resource webpage is here.
- On Thursday and Friday, Tempe's City Council will be holding a number of mostly budget-related meetings.
After Thursday's regularly scheduled Council meeting (agenda for that here), they will be holding a meeting of the Rio Salado Community Facilities District Board to consider the tentative budget and assessments for the district.
On Friday, the Tempe City Council will be holding a budget workshop. The agenda for that includes discussion of "budget balancing" proposals for the City's Golf Fund, Performing Arts Fund, Transportation Fund, and Transit Fund (more layoffs coming, folks) and a discussion of the City's Capital Improvement Plan follow up.
Look for similar meetings in the other cities and towns in AZ shortly, if they haven't taken place already.
While the antics of the state legislature and governor garner more press (and notice from the likes of me), what our City Councils are doing has a far more direct impact on our day-to-day lives, and deserve at least as much attention.
Jan Brewer wants to "rebrand" Arizona's image
Arizona's unelected governor, Jan Brewer, has finally realized the furor over the police-state bill that she signed into law, SB1070, won't die down. Arizona's image across the country and the world has become that of a virulently redneck place where minorities and outsiders are only welcome in our prisons and jails.
So in typical Jan fashion, she's forming a commission of business types and giving them some of the state's ever-more scarce financial resources ($250K!) to get the message out that Arizona really is a swell place to visit, gosh darn it.
From the AZ Republic article -
Not really an improvement that. The law has gone from "arrest immigrants and tourists for asking a police officer for directions or the time of day" to "arrest immigrants and tourists for merely being in the vicinity of a noise ordinance or sign code violation (think that there will be any of those in an election year?)".
No crime has to be committed by a person for the police to demand to see their papers, they only have to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Victims, witnesses, and even completely uninvolved bystanders are at risk for arrest. And the kicker is, if the law enforcement officer understands that and doesn't demand to see the papers of everyone he has contact with, he will get sued by anybody who so desires. In short, the law is written in such a way as to condition law enforcement officers to go after everybody, even if it is counterproductive to public safety or justice.
Anyway, if Jan and her clan want to improve Arizona's image, here are a few suggestions to her from someone who is sick of starting conversations with outsiders with "Hi, I'm from Arizona, and no, we aren't all nuts" -
1. People won't boycott AZ over bigoted police state laws if you don't sign them in the first place.
Duh.
2. Quit enacting laws like the "anybody can carry a concealed weapon without training or a background check" law. Not only do outsiders think that we are bigots, they think that we are bigots who are heavily-armed and trigger-happy. And who can get our drunk on earlier than ever before.
3. Stop lying about the problem, and instead focus your energy on fixing it.
Later...
So in typical Jan fashion, she's forming a commission of business types and giving them some of the state's ever-more scarce financial resources ($250K!) to get the message out that Arizona really is a swell place to visit, gosh darn it.
From the AZ Republic article -
Acknowledging that Arizona has developed a serious image problem because of its tough new immigration law, Gov. Jan Brewer and tourism-industry leaders said Thursday that they will launch a new effort to stanch the flow of lost trade and convention business in the state.To address the lie first - SB1070 contains the following section:
{snip}
A new task force is charged with rebranding and repositioning the state as a unique destination spot.
That is sure to be a tough task after weeks of talk-show comedians, celebrities, politicians and others making Arizona a punch line, calling the law racist and drawing comparisons to fascism and Nazi Germany.
{snip, for the big whopper of the piece}
The governor said much of the furor is caused by what she characterized as "mistruths" about the new law.
As an example, Brewer said it has been erroneously reported that the new immigration law would allow racial profiling and that visitors can't come to Arizona without ID or they'll be arrested.
"You aren't going to be asked for ID unless you first commit a crime," she said.
FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OF A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON...That section was adjusted with the passage of HB2162 with this language -
For any lawfulcontactSTOP, DETENTION OR ARREST made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state or a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF ANY OTHER LAW OR ORDINANCE OF A COUNTY, CITY OR TOWN OR THIS STATE...
Not really an improvement that. The law has gone from "arrest immigrants and tourists for asking a police officer for directions or the time of day" to "arrest immigrants and tourists for merely being in the vicinity of a noise ordinance or sign code violation (think that there will be any of those in an election year?)".
No crime has to be committed by a person for the police to demand to see their papers, they only have to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Victims, witnesses, and even completely uninvolved bystanders are at risk for arrest. And the kicker is, if the law enforcement officer understands that and doesn't demand to see the papers of everyone he has contact with, he will get sued by anybody who so desires. In short, the law is written in such a way as to condition law enforcement officers to go after everybody, even if it is counterproductive to public safety or justice.
Anyway, if Jan and her clan want to improve Arizona's image, here are a few suggestions to her from someone who is sick of starting conversations with outsiders with "Hi, I'm from Arizona, and no, we aren't all nuts" -
1. People won't boycott AZ over bigoted police state laws if you don't sign them in the first place.
Duh.
2. Quit enacting laws like the "anybody can carry a concealed weapon without training or a background check" law. Not only do outsiders think that we are bigots, they think that we are bigots who are heavily-armed and trigger-happy. And who can get our drunk on earlier than ever before.
3. Stop lying about the problem, and instead focus your energy on fixing it.
Later...
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Pearce facing challengers for his seat in the AZ Senate
While State Senator Russell Pearce (R-National Alliance) has been traipsing across the country and the cable news shows crowing about his police state bill, challengers have been lining up for a chance to represent West Mesa in the Arizona State Senate.
...In February, Robert H. McDonald announced his candidacy for the Democratic nomination for the LD18 Senate seat.
...In mid-April, Andrea Garcia formed a committee to pursue the Libertarian nomination in LD18.
...A week later in April, Andrew Sherwood formed a committee for the Democratic nomination, setting up a primary on the Democratic side of the ballot, something that hasn't happened since at least 1992 (which was as far back as I checked. The area covered by LD18 now was LD29 in the 1990s. Before that, I don't know what district it was.)
During the last nine election cycles, there hasn't been even one instance of a contested primary on the D side of the Senate ballot. In fact, in many of the cycles, there hasn't been even one Democratic challenger for the Senate seat.
*Two" Democrats duking it out for the chance to unseat Pearce after years of token opposition (and not even that much of of the time)? Be still my beating heart...
I don't know much about Sherwood or McDonald at this point, but Garcia has turned in her nominating petitions. On her website, she even talks about how she submitted "nearly twice the required number [of signatures] to qualify for the August 24th primary election."
Sounds like a groundswell of support, if only of the ABRP variety (ABRP = Anybody But Russell Pearce), right?
It does, until you find out that as a Libertarian, she only needs 6 signatures to qualify for the ballot.
She submitted 11, so her "nearly twice the required number" statement *is* technically true, but... :)
Anyway, after months of embarrassing the state and years of doing everything except for representing his district, Pearce looks to be facing serious competition this time around.
Later...
...In February, Robert H. McDonald announced his candidacy for the Democratic nomination for the LD18 Senate seat.
...In mid-April, Andrea Garcia formed a committee to pursue the Libertarian nomination in LD18.
...A week later in April, Andrew Sherwood formed a committee for the Democratic nomination, setting up a primary on the Democratic side of the ballot, something that hasn't happened since at least 1992 (which was as far back as I checked. The area covered by LD18 now was LD29 in the 1990s. Before that, I don't know what district it was.)
During the last nine election cycles, there hasn't been even one instance of a contested primary on the D side of the Senate ballot. In fact, in many of the cycles, there hasn't been even one Democratic challenger for the Senate seat.
*Two" Democrats duking it out for the chance to unseat Pearce after years of token opposition (and not even that much of of the time)? Be still my beating heart...
I don't know much about Sherwood or McDonald at this point, but Garcia has turned in her nominating petitions. On her website, she even talks about how she submitted "nearly twice the required number [of signatures] to qualify for the August 24th primary election."
Sounds like a groundswell of support, if only of the ABRP variety (ABRP = Anybody But Russell Pearce), right?
It does, until you find out that as a Libertarian, she only needs 6 signatures to qualify for the ballot.
She submitted 11, so her "nearly twice the required number" statement *is* technically true, but... :)
Anyway, after months of embarrassing the state and years of doing everything except for representing his district, Pearce looks to be facing serious competition this time around.
Later...
Friday, May 14, 2010
Harry Mitchell's bill to freeze Congressional pay signed into law by the President
Lost in the hyperpartisan hubbub of election-year posturing across the state and country ("Hayworth this!" "McCain that!", etc.) has been the workmanlike job turned in by CD5's Congressman, Harry Mitchell.
Whether it is tirelessly advocating for America's veterans (including calling out the VA for its lackluster performance of its own job) or simply recognizing a long-time colleague in public service on his retirement, Mitchell's work in Congress has been the definition of "good government."
"Good government" may not be as sexy as the "health care reform" package that passed Congress earlier this year or as incendiary aspolice state bill "immigration reform" bill that passed the Arizona legislature last month, but it is the most important part of elected officials' jobs.
Note to Tea Party/Republican types: imagine reading that sentence with "sexy" and "incendiary" switched. That sentence will still work for you. :)
Today's signing of H.R. 5146 is part of that pattern of good government. It garnered bipartisan support (79 cosponsors from both sides of the aisle, including conservative icons Jeff Flake and Ron Paul, and overwhelming support when the measure reached the floor - 402-15 in the House, unanimous in the Senate).
In a statement on the signing, Mitchell said -
Whether it is tirelessly advocating for America's veterans (including calling out the VA for its lackluster performance of its own job) or simply recognizing a long-time colleague in public service on his retirement, Mitchell's work in Congress has been the definition of "good government."
"Good government" may not be as sexy as the "health care reform" package that passed Congress earlier this year or as incendiary as
Note to Tea Party/Republican types: imagine reading that sentence with "sexy" and "incendiary" switched. That sentence will still work for you. :)
Today's signing of H.R. 5146 is part of that pattern of good government. It garnered bipartisan support (79 cosponsors from both sides of the aisle, including conservative icons Jeff Flake and Ron Paul, and overwhelming support when the measure reached the floor - 402-15 in the House, unanimous in the Senate).
In a statement on the signing, Mitchell said -
"To raise Congressional pay at a time when so many families are still struggling to make ends meet would be unconscionable and glaringly out of touch. I am pleased that President Obama has signed this bipartisan legislation into law. This sends an important message. The American people are not getting a raise this year and neither should Congress."
While some might deride Mitchell's bill as an election year stunt, it should be remembered that he has proposed the same measure every year since entering Congress. This was no stunt, just Harry doing his job.
Mitchell's full statement on today's signing here.Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Short Attention Span Musing
Just a mish-mash of (mostly) lege-related stuff...
...Governor Jan Brewer has vetoed HB2462, Rep. Ed Ableser's proposal to rein in predatory towing companies. In her veto letter (linked above to the word 'vetoed'), she cited a few reasons she was opposed to this bill, including that she felt that it added responsibilities to the Department of Public Safety (DPS) while not funding those new activities. What she didn't cite, in the letter anyway, was the fact that Rep. Ableser is known as one of the most progressive members of the Democratic and is vocal about his positions.
Including his opposition the Brewer's proposed sales tax increase (voting closes next Tuesday).
According to sources, one of the big motivations behind the veto was Ableser's vocal opposition to the tax hike because of its regressive nature.
Now to be fair, it probably wasn't her only reason for the veto - most Ds voted against the referral of the sales tax increase to the ballot, but there have been a *few* D-sponsored bills signed by Brewer.
Still, an aroma of "payback" is surrounds this veto.
...There's also a whiff of hypocrisy surrounding it, too. In her letter vetoing the bill, Brewer also cited a concern for maintaining local control of local matters.
This the same day she signed HB2281, barring local school districts from offering ethnic studies courses to their students.
...There is a rumor that there will be yet another special session of the lege (8 and counting so far). The plan for this one, if it goes off, will be to pass some version of the Republicans' corporate bailout bill (HB2250 in the regular session).
They'll want to do this ASAP, in order to maximize corporate spending on their campaigns, but this move may be bad tactically. They should have passed this *before* passing SB1070, Russell Pearce's "show us your papers" anti-immigrant bill. If they had, their corporate tax cuts would have been lost in the uproar over their scheme to suspend Bill of Rights protections for people with brown skin.
Now, the AZ lege is under a nationwide microscope, and anything they do will be dissected.
If more of the Rs had attended last week's Project Civil Discourse Town Hall on the sales tax (only House Republican leader John McComish was there), they might be rethinking their plans.
While there was a variety of perspectives on the sales tax proposal, one thread seemed to run through all the comments, whether supporting or opposing the referendum - almost nobody trusts the legislature to handle things properly.
...The Arizona Democratic Party has come out in opposition to the calls for a boycott of Arizona over SB1070. They feel a boycott will hurt the average Arizonan, most of whom have nothing to do with the bill, and prefer to rally support and change the composition of the legislature. (my paraphrase, so if any nuances have been missed, the fault is mine)
I understand the reasoning and even would agree with it, except that this is Arizona.
Here, the Republicans refuse to hear any of the voices raised in protest to their anti-immigrant law, but they will hear (and have heard in the past) the sound of closing wallets.
Until the ADP implements a "30 District" strategy to contest every seat in the lege and sticks with it, and either gains control of one or both chambers of the lege (or at least makes the Rs learn that they can't take control of the lege for granted), the Rs aren't going to change.
As such, while I agree that a boycott will have negative effects on many Arizonans that weren't involved in the passage of SB1070, those effects will be less bad than the effects of the law if it goes unchallenged.
...It looks as if even national Republicans are embarrassed by their Arizona counterparts. In what comes as a bit of a surprise, the GOP has bypassed Phoenix and awarded its 2012 convention to Tampa, Florida.
Tampa???? Phoenix was stood up for Tampa?? Thank you Russell Pearce and Jan Brewer...
Hmmm....wouldn't it be sweet if the Democratic National Committee now decides to hold its convention here? You know that the R whackjobs would crawl out from under every rock in the Southwest to make their presence known...colorfully...in front of half the TV cameras in the known universe.
Just randomly musing... :)
...Yesterday, I got a dirty look from a signature collector for one of the three Democrats who recently jumped into the race to challenge for John McCain's Senate seat. When she approached me for a sig, I advised her that I couldn't sign the petition because I had signed another candidate's paperwork (Rodney Glassman). The dirty look came when I further advised her that she and her candidate should have begun collecting sigs months before the deadline, not three weeks before.
The sad part is that I was trying to be helpful. I think a couple of the candidates are interesting, even intriguing. However, a candidate for a U.S. Senate seat can't make the run/don't run decision on the spur of the moment, and it looks like these three did so.
May 2010 is the time to start building the foundation for a 2012 run at Jon Kyl's seat, not for a 2010 run at John McCain's seat.
Later...
...Governor Jan Brewer has vetoed HB2462, Rep. Ed Ableser's proposal to rein in predatory towing companies. In her veto letter (linked above to the word 'vetoed'), she cited a few reasons she was opposed to this bill, including that she felt that it added responsibilities to the Department of Public Safety (DPS) while not funding those new activities. What she didn't cite, in the letter anyway, was the fact that Rep. Ableser is known as one of the most progressive members of the Democratic and is vocal about his positions.
Including his opposition the Brewer's proposed sales tax increase (voting closes next Tuesday).
According to sources, one of the big motivations behind the veto was Ableser's vocal opposition to the tax hike because of its regressive nature.
Now to be fair, it probably wasn't her only reason for the veto - most Ds voted against the referral of the sales tax increase to the ballot, but there have been a *few* D-sponsored bills signed by Brewer.
Still, an aroma of "payback" is surrounds this veto.
...There's also a whiff of hypocrisy surrounding it, too. In her letter vetoing the bill, Brewer also cited a concern for maintaining local control of local matters.
This the same day she signed HB2281, barring local school districts from offering ethnic studies courses to their students.
...There is a rumor that there will be yet another special session of the lege (8 and counting so far). The plan for this one, if it goes off, will be to pass some version of the Republicans' corporate bailout bill (HB2250 in the regular session).
They'll want to do this ASAP, in order to maximize corporate spending on their campaigns, but this move may be bad tactically. They should have passed this *before* passing SB1070, Russell Pearce's "show us your papers" anti-immigrant bill. If they had, their corporate tax cuts would have been lost in the uproar over their scheme to suspend Bill of Rights protections for people with brown skin.
Now, the AZ lege is under a nationwide microscope, and anything they do will be dissected.
If more of the Rs had attended last week's Project Civil Discourse Town Hall on the sales tax (only House Republican leader John McComish was there), they might be rethinking their plans.
While there was a variety of perspectives on the sales tax proposal, one thread seemed to run through all the comments, whether supporting or opposing the referendum - almost nobody trusts the legislature to handle things properly.
...The Arizona Democratic Party has come out in opposition to the calls for a boycott of Arizona over SB1070. They feel a boycott will hurt the average Arizonan, most of whom have nothing to do with the bill, and prefer to rally support and change the composition of the legislature. (my paraphrase, so if any nuances have been missed, the fault is mine)
I understand the reasoning and even would agree with it, except that this is Arizona.
Here, the Republicans refuse to hear any of the voices raised in protest to their anti-immigrant law, but they will hear (and have heard in the past) the sound of closing wallets.
Until the ADP implements a "30 District" strategy to contest every seat in the lege and sticks with it, and either gains control of one or both chambers of the lege (or at least makes the Rs learn that they can't take control of the lege for granted), the Rs aren't going to change.
As such, while I agree that a boycott will have negative effects on many Arizonans that weren't involved in the passage of SB1070, those effects will be less bad than the effects of the law if it goes unchallenged.
...It looks as if even national Republicans are embarrassed by their Arizona counterparts. In what comes as a bit of a surprise, the GOP has bypassed Phoenix and awarded its 2012 convention to Tampa, Florida.
Tampa???? Phoenix was stood up for Tampa?? Thank you Russell Pearce and Jan Brewer...
Hmmm....wouldn't it be sweet if the Democratic National Committee now decides to hold its convention here? You know that the R whackjobs would crawl out from under every rock in the Southwest to make their presence known...colorfully...in front of half the TV cameras in the known universe.
Just randomly musing... :)
...Yesterday, I got a dirty look from a signature collector for one of the three Democrats who recently jumped into the race to challenge for John McCain's Senate seat. When she approached me for a sig, I advised her that I couldn't sign the petition because I had signed another candidate's paperwork (Rodney Glassman). The dirty look came when I further advised her that she and her candidate should have begun collecting sigs months before the deadline, not three weeks before.
The sad part is that I was trying to be helpful. I think a couple of the candidates are interesting, even intriguing. However, a candidate for a U.S. Senate seat can't make the run/don't run decision on the spur of the moment, and it looks like these three did so.
May 2010 is the time to start building the foundation for a 2012 run at Jon Kyl's seat, not for a 2010 run at John McCain's seat.
Later...
Monday, May 10, 2010
Kagan is the Supreme Court nominee
The Party of No is already gearing up their "we oppose everything" campaign, but President Obama's nomination of United States Solicitor General Elena Kagan should go relatively smoothly. They seem to be stressing the fact that she has never been a judge, all the while conveniently ignoring that many Supreme Court Justices have not been judges prior to their appointment to the Court.
Including John Roberts, the current Chief Justice, a Bush II nominee.
Apparently the phenomenon of IOKIYAR isn't just confined to Arizona.
While the confirmation process promises to be a colorful one, particularly given that this is an election year with its incentive for partisan posturing, expectations are that Kagan will be confirmed.
From the email sent out by the President announcing his pick -
Later...
Including John Roberts, the current Chief Justice, a Bush II nominee.
Apparently the phenomenon of IOKIYAR isn't just confined to Arizona.
While the confirmation process promises to be a colorful one, particularly given that this is an election year with its incentive for partisan posturing, expectations are that Kagan will be confirmed.
From the email sent out by the President announcing his pick -
Today, it is my great honor to nominate our Solicitor General, and my friend, Elena Kagan, to be the next justice of the United States Supreme Court.
As I send my nomination to the Senate, I wanted to record a special message for you that I hope will help us launch a national discussion.
Take a minute to watch this video, and then help me to introduce Elena to your friends and family by passing it on.
Elena is widely regarded as one of the best legal minds of her generation -- earning praise from across the ideological spectrum throughout her career. Above all, she is a trailblazer. She wasn't just the first woman to serve as dean of Harvard Law School -- she was one of its most beloved and successful leaders, building a reputation for openness to other viewpoints and skill in working with others to build consensus. These were some of the many reasons why I selected her to be my Solicitor General, the nation's chief advocate -- the first woman to hold that post as well.
Her work as Solicitor General has allowed me to see firsthand just why Elena is particularly well-suited to the Court: She has not only a keen understanding of the law, but also one that is rooted in a deep awareness of its impact on people's lives. Last year, she made that clear -- choosing the Citizens United case as her first to argue before the Supreme Court, defending bipartisan campaign finance reform against special interests seeking to spend unlimited money to influence our elections.
Now, I look forward to the prospect of Elena taking her seat alongside Justice Ginsberg and Justice Sotomayor. For the first time, our nation's highest court would include three women, ensuring a Court that would be more inclusive, more representative, more reflective of us as a people than ever before.
When Justice Stevens wrote me to announce his retirement, I knew that the Court would be losing a standard bearer. And I felt a responsibility to nominate an individual capable of being that same guiding force, a consistent voice of reason on the Court.
I am certain I have made the right choice. As you learn more about Elena, I am confident you'll see what I do -- that she is a voice we need on the Supreme Court.
Please watch the message -- and share it with others:
http://my.barackobama.com/ElenaKagan
Thank you,
President Barack Obama
Later...
Saturday, May 08, 2010
Arpaio refuses to show his documents
And the "delicious irony" series continues...
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is one of the most ardent supporters of the Fourth Amendment-overriding SB1070, the new law in Arizona that requires folks to produce documents proving citizenship/legal presence in the U.S. whenever a law enforcement officer demands that they do so.
Turns out he isn't so enthusiastic about the production of documents when he's the one expected to produce them.
From the Arizona Republic -
BTW - "delicious irony" is a euphemism for "raging hypocrisy."
Just in case you didn't figure that one out on your own... :)
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is one of the most ardent supporters of the Fourth Amendment-overriding SB1070, the new law in Arizona that requires folks to produce documents proving citizenship/legal presence in the U.S. whenever a law enforcement officer demands that they do so.
Turns out he isn't so enthusiastic about the production of documents when he's the one expected to produce them.
From the Arizona Republic -
The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office on Friday refused to turn over financial documents the Board of Supervisors requested in a subpoena, saying officials were abusing their power.
The supervisors served the subpoena last month seeking documents dating from Jan. 1, 2005, including credit-card transactions, work assignments, a list of all detainees or defendants extradited by the office, expenditures from various funds and a complete list of all bank accounts.
BTW - "delicious irony" is a euphemism for "raging hypocrisy."
Just in case you didn't figure that one out on your own... :)
Thursday, May 06, 2010
AZGOP, the voter vault, and delicious irony
The "voter vault" is the AZGOP's database of voter info (contact info, demographic info, etc.) that is used by Republican candidates use during their campaigns.
The Arizona Republic ran a story detailing how the AZGOP has refused Republican Rick Romley access to the database because of his "past actions."
From the story -
From the Phoenix New Times, less than five months ago (emphasis mine) -
Welcome to the 21st Century GOP.
Note: I generally don't discuss the internal operations of the AZGOP. It's their party (and they'll cry if they want to :) ) and within the bounds of law (SCA, anyone?) and good taste (SCA again), they can do whatever they want to do to themselves.
But they served this one up like a rookie pitcher trying to blow a BP fastball by Albert Pujols.
The Arizona Republic ran a story detailing how the AZGOP has refused Republican Rick Romley access to the database because of his "past actions."
From the story -
How Republican is Republican enough?The money quote was in the middle of the article.
Apparently, it requires toeing the most-conservative end of the party line, as Interim Maricopa County Attorney Rick Romley recently discovered when he kicked off his campaign for a permanent job in the county administration building.
{snip}
Mecum questioned Romley's consulting work for Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat, and Romley's support of Democratic candidates who ran unsuccessfully against Sheriff Joe Arpaio, former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and Gov. Jan Brewer, all Republicans.
Romley did not return calls for comment Wednesday.
But he was not the only Republican iced out of the database.
DeeDee Blase, who heads a conservative Hispanic Republican organization called Somos Republicans, has tried to access the database since October. Blase intended to contact Hispanics identified as independents to "bring them into the tent." She also hoped to nominate Hispanics to fill empty precinct-committeeman positions.
Her quest: "Where are the Hispanic areas so I can target them and educate them?"
Mecum replied to Blase with a similar e-mail, saying access to the voter information was a privilege, not a right. "Concerns revolving around endorsements and public statements you have made in recent months that make me very wary of granting you access to Voter Vault," he wrote.
"Voter Vault access is a privilege and not an express right for Republican candidates," Arizona Republican Party Executive Director Brett Mecum wrote in an April 21 e-mail to Romley.Ummm...the AZGOP really may want to consider selecting another one of its functionaries to speak publicly regarding its Voter Vault. Or at least get a longer memory. In addition, either way, Mecum is probably not the most suitable gatekeeper for Voter Vault access.
From the Phoenix New Times, less than five months ago (emphasis mine) -
Arizona Republican Party Executive Director Brett Mecum is "creepy around women," according to a complaint filed with the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office.Based on the evidence, it seems that the AZGOP is OK with people who stalk women accessing its voter information, while people who criticize Joe Arpaio and Andy Thomas are completely unfit for access to the Voter Vault.
A criminal complaint, dredged up by the Yellow Sheet, was filed against Mecum last month, and it claims he used voter registration records to find a woman's address and crash a party at her house.
Check out the affidavit here.
{snip}
The woman says she never gave Mecum her address, nor did she think he even knew where she lived.
When she asked him how he found her address, she claims Mecum told her he had a staffer look it up on Voter Vault, a state voter-registration list.
Welcome to the 21st Century GOP.
Note: I generally don't discuss the internal operations of the AZGOP. It's their party (and they'll cry if they want to :) ) and within the bounds of law (SCA, anyone?) and good taste (SCA again), they can do whatever they want to do to themselves.
But they served this one up like a rookie pitcher trying to blow a BP fastball by Albert Pujols.
Wednesday, May 05, 2010
A day where I almost sound like a conservative...
,,,emphasis on the *almost*,..
- In the wake of the news that the suspect in the attempted car-bombing of Times Square this weekend was able to buy a firearm after his name had been added to the government's terror watch list, there have been calls to bar people on that list from purchasing a firearm.
This is a bad idea that shouldn't go any farther than than a few election year press releases.
The conservatives will be against this because they oppose any restrictions on firearms possession.
I oppose this because nobody really knows how people get on the watch list (I could end up there because of this post, and won't know about it until the next time I fly somewhere) and it is almost literally riddled with errors.
Bottom line: People are innocent until proven guilty, even those suspected of association with terrorist activities/organizations. When somebody has been fairly and openly charged, tried, and convicted, then their civil rights can be curtailed. Until then, if they haven't actually done something to merit a firearms ban (felony conviction, mental illness, domestic violence), they should be able to purchase a gun like everyone else.
- On Monday, a Philadelphia teen ran onto the field during a Philadelphia Phillies' baseball game and ran all over the field like a complete idiot until he was tasered by a Philly PD officer, prompting calls for an investigation into the officer's use of the taser.
Do I think that the use of the taser was appropriate? No matter what the Philly PD says, NO. The kid wasn't a threat to himself or others; therefore there was no reason to use potentially lethal force on him.
I also think that the given the vast number of times that tasers have been used under circumstances that were questionable at best, the uproar over this one seems to be rooted in the fact there there were witnesses to this particular use, and that the suspect was a clean-cut (though profoundly dumb) white kid.
All incidents involving use of force by the police should be independently investigated, not just the incidents where there are thousands of witnesses.
BTW - I'm fully aware that if the officer *hadn't* tasered the kid and instead had tackled him (as is the norm for most such incidents) and the kid had been injured, there would be an uproar over that, too.
- In the wake of the news that the suspect in the attempted car-bombing of Times Square this weekend was able to buy a firearm after his name had been added to the government's terror watch list, there have been calls to bar people on that list from purchasing a firearm.
This is a bad idea that shouldn't go any farther than than a few election year press releases.
The conservatives will be against this because they oppose any restrictions on firearms possession.
I oppose this because nobody really knows how people get on the watch list (I could end up there because of this post, and won't know about it until the next time I fly somewhere) and it is almost literally riddled with errors.
Bottom line: People are innocent until proven guilty, even those suspected of association with terrorist activities/organizations. When somebody has been fairly and openly charged, tried, and convicted, then their civil rights can be curtailed. Until then, if they haven't actually done something to merit a firearms ban (felony conviction, mental illness, domestic violence), they should be able to purchase a gun like everyone else.
- On Monday, a Philadelphia teen ran onto the field during a Philadelphia Phillies' baseball game and ran all over the field like a complete idiot until he was tasered by a Philly PD officer, prompting calls for an investigation into the officer's use of the taser.
Do I think that the use of the taser was appropriate? No matter what the Philly PD says, NO. The kid wasn't a threat to himself or others; therefore there was no reason to use potentially lethal force on him.
I also think that the given the vast number of times that tasers have been used under circumstances that were questionable at best, the uproar over this one seems to be rooted in the fact there there were witnesses to this particular use, and that the suspect was a clean-cut (though profoundly dumb) white kid.
All incidents involving use of force by the police should be independently investigated, not just the incidents where there are thousands of witnesses.
BTW - I'm fully aware that if the officer *hadn't* tasered the kid and instead had tackled him (as is the norm for most such incidents) and the kid had been injured, there would be an uproar over that, too.
Sales Tax Town Hall on Thursday
From the website of the Arizona Humanities Council -
Project Civil Discourse's website is here.
It looks as if the discussion won't be "non-partisan" so much as "non-belligerent." It should be an interesting change-of-pace from the normal political discussions in Arizona.
Later...
The partners of Project Civil Discourse in collaboration with the Arizona Republican, Democratic and Libertarian Parties present
Arizona's Sales Tax Referendum Town Hall: A Demonstration of Civil Dialogue and Discussion
Thursday, May 6, 2010 6:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m.
AE England Building,
Civic Park Space
424 North Central Avenue Phoenix, AZ 85004
Free and Open to the PublicRegistration is Required as Space is Limited
Click here to register
Many Americans are troubled by the lack of civility we see too often in politics today. We know that to solve the problems facing Arizona and the Nation, we must find a way to work together collaboratively and respectfully.
In response, Project Civil Discourse is partnering with the leaders of our state's political parties and over 20 organizations throughout Arizona to host a civil and respectful town hall about the implications of Prop. 100, the sales tax referendum, which is up for public vote on May 18th.
Arizona's Sales Tax Referendum Town Hall: A Demonstration of Civil Dialogue and Discussion will open with an objective, non-partisan explanation from Peter Burns about the state budget and how the outcome of the sales tax vote will affect Arizona. Participants will then join in roundtable discussions to share ideas, and learn from one another about this important issue facing our state. A report of the event will be widely distributed.
Project Civil Discourse's website is here.
It looks as if the discussion won't be "non-partisan" so much as "non-belligerent." It should be an interesting change-of-pace from the normal political discussions in Arizona.
Later...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)