Sen. Ed Ableser (LD26) hosting a forum on capital punishment tomorrow...

From a press release -

Senator Ed Ableser will host a forum on capital punishment at the Arizona Senate on Friday, September 13^th. Joined by legislators from both sides of the aisle and guests from government, law enforcement, criminal defense, religious institutions, victims’ rights groups and academics, Sen. Ableser will lead the discussion of the current state of capital punishment in Arizona and its future role in crime deterrence and punishment.

 

WHAT:           Legislative Forum on Capital Punishment

 

WHO:             Guests scheduled to attend include:

·       Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery

·       Auxiliary Bishop Eduardo Nevares of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Phoenix

·       Alan Tavassoli of the Maricopa County Office of the Public Defender

·       Reverend Oscar Tillman, President of the Maricopa County branch of the NAACP

·       Carol Gaxiola, Director of Homicide Survivors

·       Timothy LaSota of the law firm Tiffany & Bosco PA

·       Larry Hammond of the law firm Osborn Maledon PA

·       John Johnson, Professor Emeritus of Justice Studies at Arizona State University

 

WHEN:           Friday, September 13^th at 9 a.m.

 

WHERE:         Senate Hearing Room 1

 

 

 

A few pictures from the 2012 election cycle

Most of these pics have been shared here or on FB already, but are worth another look...

State Sen. David Schapira addressing a crowd of voters in Tempe in January while he was exploring a run for Congress.  He finished the primary in 2nd place.

From March:  The CD5 delegates to the Democratic National Convention, (L-R) Janie Hydrick, Chase Williams, Laura Copple, Jerry Gettinger, Lauren Kuby, and Randy Keating

Paul Penzone, candidate for Maricopa County Sheriff, speaking at an event in Tempe

At the same April event, the future LD26 legislative team - (L-R, standing) Reps-elect Juan Mendez and Andrew Sherwood and Sen.-elect Ed Ableser

Mark Mitchell in April, the future Mayor of Tempe.  He emerged victorious in Tempe's election in May.

Andrei Cherny, candidate for Congress, addressing a meeting of the LD24 Democrats; he finished third in the primary.

In July, putting up signs

In July, an overflow crowd at Changing Hands Bookstore in Tempe for a Congressional primary forum

Congressional candidate Kyrsten Sinema at the July forum.  She emerged from the primary as the nominee.

Not political or anything to do with the election cycle; I just like the sign.

In August, Harry Mitchell addressing a crowd at an event in Tempe

September: Future state rep. Juan Mendez speaking at the LD26 campaign office in Tempe

US Senate candidate Rich Carmona speaking to a supporter at the same Tempe event in September

The "crowd" at the Clean Elections debate for LD24 legislative candidates in September

In September, future State Rep. Andrew Sherwood (standing) greeting friends in Tempe in September

Kyrsten Sinema addressing the crowd at the same Tempe event in September
 

Election Day: watching early national returns at the Arizona Democratic Party headquarters in Phoenix

Election Day: The crowd gathering at the Renaissance watching election night coverage on CNN

Election night: Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton speaking to the hundreds gathered at the Renaissance

The jublilant crowd as the election is called for President Obama

All of the above pics were taken by me and represent just the tiniest portion of the effort and energy and dedication of the 2012 election cycle.  Similar scenes and more took place across the state all year, and while a guy with a camera may not have been at each place, they were all a part of the successes of the cycle.

Voting *for* a candidate: a guide

During an election cycle, particularly a long one like a presidential cycle, it's easy to lose sight of why we support this candidate or that candidate, losing ourselves in being against the "other".

The reasons why we support candidate "A" become subsumed by the fact that candidate "B" is an arrogant, avaricious plutocrat or the reasons that we support candidate "X" are drowned in the glare of candidate "Y's" bigotry, corruption, etc.

As easy as voting"against" can be, voting "for" is far more satisfying.  I've been voting for a while now.  Not gonna say how long, but the first presidential ticket that received my vote was Mondale/Ferraro.  You do the math. :)

While most of my votes have been "for" a candidate, too many have been for the "less bad" candidate.  The most satisfying votes that I've ever cast were for Harry Mitchell.  While he is nowhere near liberal enough to suit me politically, he based his positions, and his votes in office, on what he thought was in the best interests of his constituents.

Voting for him in 2010 when David Schweikert took advantage of the Republican wave that year to oust an icon was no less satisfying than voting for him in 2006 when Mitchell first won a seat in Congress.

Having said all of that, here's my "positive" take on my votes this year, why I voted "for" particular candidate.  There were lots of  "for" candidates this year -


- Barack Obama for President - I enthusiastically voted for him in 2008, and proudly did so again this year. 

In the face of intractable opposition (to the point that Republicans in Congress voted against bills that they had sponsored themselves if Obama supported them), he led the start of real healthcare reform, started winding down the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, fought for tax cuts for the working and middle classes, saved the American auto industry, and oversaw the end for Osama Bin Laden. 

To be sure, there were a few missteps, but even most of those just showed that the man is simply human (stay off the pitcher's mound, Mr. President :) ).

My biggest complaint with him is that he hasn't be liberal enough in his governance.

However, that dovetails with the biggest reason to vote to give him a second term - he has governed.  Not ruled, not dictated, not anything but do his job.

He has worked *for* his constituents, all of them, not just those who agree with him or give him campaign contributions.

You may not agree with everything he's done in office; I like and support him, and even *I* don't agree with everything that the Obama administration has done. 

However, he has done what he has done out of concern for the best interests of his constituents, which should be the motivation behind the positions and actions of *all* elected officials.

As such, he has more than earned a second term in the oval office.

Picture courtesy CNN

I promise that the rest of these will be much shorter.  :)

- Dr. Rich Carmona for U.S. Senate - This may be his first foray into electoral politics, but it's not his first foray into public service.  Not hardly.

In his storied career, he has been an Army medic (in Vietnam), a SWAT team leader, and Surgeon General of the United States.  His life story is the archetypal American success story - born to immigrant parents, worked to obtain an education, lifted himself out of poverty, and has spent his adult life in public service of one sort or another.

In short, he's the sort of person who *should* be in office because he has been where most of us have been.

Carmona talking to a supporter in Tempe, September 15

- Kyrsten Sinema for U.S. Congress (CD9) - *Not* her first foray into electoral politics, but it's hardly her first foray into public service.  Like Carmona above, she bootstrapped her way out of poverty with education and hard work, and like Carmona, she has dedicated her life to serving the public.  In her case, she has been a social worker, attorney, and educator.

And like Carmona, she is the kind of person who should be in office representing us because she has been and is us.

Sinema at a candidate forum in July in Tempe

- Katie Hobbs (Senate) and Lela Alston and Chad Campbell (House) for the Arizona legislature from LD24 - They are each experienced, dedicated, intelligent, hard-working, and caring public servants and have earned another term in office.

(L-R) Hobbs, Alston, and Campbell at the LD24 Clean Elections forum in Phoenix, September 25th

Bonus legislative race:  Ed Ableser (Senate) and Juan Mendez and Andrew Sherwood (House) for the Arizona legislature from LD26 -  While they were not on my ballot (I live in LD24), all three are friends of mine and people who I respect.  They are active members of the community and have and will work for the betterment of the community.

 

 

(Standing L-R) Mendez, Sherwood, and Ableser at the LD26 Chili Cook-Off, April 28

 

- Paul Penzone for Maricopa County Sheriff - Penzone is a career cop who has based his career on *involving* the entire community, not demonizing* part of it for personal and political gain.  When he is elected, he'll bring a level of professionalism and integrity to the MCSO that hasn't been seen there in decades.

Penzone in Tempe, April 28 (same event as in the above pic, only a couple of hours earlier)

- Marcia Busching, Sandra Kennedy, and Paul Newman for the Arizona Corporation Commission - While the members of this trio bring a variety of experiences and backgrounds to the table, but they share a focus on ensuring Arizona's energy future.

Are all of the above candidates Democrats?  Yup.

But before the above is dismissed as "partisan hackery", one should ask if all of the above candidates are the "best" candidates. 

The answer to that question is a resounding "Yes".

Their primary concern has been (in the case of previous or current officeholders) or will be (in the case of future officeholders) the best interests of the people that they represent.

I don't expect to agree with them on every single issue, but I do expect that every person who "represents" me to hold positions, craft policies, and cast votes based on the best interests of their constituents.

And before anyone begins thinking that I've gone soft, an "against" post will follow this one.  :)

Jerry Lewis: Personally Civil, Politically Extreme

In the new Legislative District 26 (West Mesa, most of Tempe), current State Rep. Ed Ableser (D-LD17 - Tempe, South Scottsdale) is facing off against current State Sen. Jerry Lewis (R-LD18 - Central and West Mesa).

Ableser was first elected to the House in 2006 and has done an admirable job of representing his ASU-centric district while starting a family and a professional career.  He was and is a perfect match for a diverse, educated, moderate, and mostly middle-class district.

Lewis was first elected to the Senate last year during the recall election that ousted nativist icon Russell Pearce from the Arizona legislature.  Lewis is a successful businessman, active in the community, and a family man.

Based on my personal knowledge of Ableser (we're friends) and everything that I've heard about Lewis (we've never met, but many people that I know also know him), both are fine men and upstanding citizens.

And while those characteristics should be expected from *every* elected official (except female electeds, who should be expected to be "fine women and upstanding citizens" :) ), alone, they aren't enough to qualify someone to represent a district in the legislature.

While Lewis has the support of the "yeah, but he's a nicer guy than Russell Pearce" brigade, that's like saying that "yeah, but he doesn't foam at the mouth like a rabid dog".  On the face of it, it may be true, but so what?  That's setting the personal temperment/behavior bar rather low.

Personally, I have a deep amount of respect for Lewis for daring to take on the Pearce machine and doing his part to end years of near-dictatorial control of the political structure by Pearce and his allies in that area.  He was the precisely right candidate for a district where the electorate was Republican-leaning but with a strong Latino contingent.  As inappropriate for society in general as Pearce's bigoted rants and stunts were, they had become an expression of open contempt for a huge portion of his constituents.

It's no coincidence that immigration issues moved to the lege's back burner when Lewis moved in.

However, that seems to be the only area where Lewis has exhibited a moderating influence.

For example, he voted for a budget that continued the lege's devastation of public education in Arizona (not really a surprise though - he's a big charter school guy; anything that is bad for public ed is good for him.  Leave him in the lege long enough and people will be talking about him like they talk about Steve Yarbrough.)

Some people like to tout Lewis as "independent" or even "moderate".  He's not -

He voted with the Center for Arizona Theocracy Policy 92% of the time.

There is absolutely NOTHING moderate about CAP; pretty much every anti-woman and anti-personal freedom measure that goes before the Arizona Legislature is a product of theirs.

In short, he may put a smiling face on it, but his extreme positions on social policy are NOT a good fit for the new LD26.  The new LD26 contains the most moderate part of Mesa as well as the portion of Tempe that contains ASU.  Nothing about Lewis says that he is a "college town" kind of legislator.

Vote for Ed Ableser.  Not only is he a part of the community that he represents, but his beliefs and priorities are in line with that community.

LD17 Legislators to hold office hours

Rep. Ed Ableser, Rep. Ben Arredondo, and Sen. David Schapira will meet, greet, and speak to constituents next Saturday at the Tempe Library.

From the website of the Arizona State Senate Democratic Caucus -

Senate Minority Leader David Schapira, Rep. Ed Ableser and Rep. Ben Arredondo (District 17)


When: Feb. 19, 11 a.m. to 1 p.m.

Where: Tempe Public Library, 3500 S. Rural Road, Tempe

Top to bottom: Sen. David Schapira, Rep. Ben Arredondo, Rep. Ed Ableser

Rep. Ed Ableser introduces a version of the Utah Compact into the Arizona Legislature

LD17's Representative Ed Ableser has introduced HCR2038, a resolution patterned after the famous Utah Compact.  It lists a set of principles for a civil discussion of immigration issues.

I'm enough of a cynic that I'm sure it won't go anywhere in the Arizona legislature but it's definitely worthy of posting here -

Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Arizona, the Senate concurring:

That in discussing immigration issues the citizens of this state should be guided by the following principles:

1. Immigration is a federal policy issue between the United States government and other countries, not Arizona and other countries. Arizona's congressional delegation, and others, should lead efforts to strengthen federal laws and protect our national borders and state leaders should adopt reasonable policies addressing immigrants in Arizona.

2. We respect the rule of law and support the professional judgment and discretion of law enforcement authorities. Local law enforcement resources should focus on criminal activities, not civil violations of the federal code.

3. Strong families are the foundation of successful communities. We oppose policies that unnecessarily separate families. We champion policies that support families and improve the health, education and well-being of all Arizona children.

4. Arizona is best served by a free-market philosophy that maximizes individual freedom and opportunity. We acknowledge the economic role immigrants play as workers and taxpayers. Arizona's immigration policies must reaffirm our global reputation as a welcoming and business-friendly state.

5. Immigrants are integrated into communities across Arizona. We must adopt a humane approach to this reality, reflecting our unique culture, history and spirit of inclusion. The way we treat immigrants says more about us as a free society and less about our immigrant neighbors. Arizona should always be a place that welcomes people of goodwill.

The measure was introduced on February 9 ("today" as I'm writing this) and assigned to the House Government Committee.

Early Ballot Time - 2010 General Election

All over Arizona, early ballots are reaching mail boxes (the ballot for my area is here).  Here are my picks (and there isn't anything here that will surprise any regular readers :) ):

U.S. Senate - Rodney Glassman.  He's got the energy and focus on the needs of Arizonans (and Arizona) that John McCain hasn't had for decades (if ever).

U.S. Representative in Congress (District 5) - Harry Mitchell.  He's got the energy and focus on the needs of his constituents, and has had it for nearly 40 years.  If the Rs in CD5 had any appreciation for public service and public servants, they'd have nominated him, too.  (Not an unheard-of happenstance.  In Massachusetts in 1982, Republican Silvio Conte won both the Democratic and Republican nominations for Congress in MA-CD1.  He went on to win the general. Back in a time when public service was valued instead of vilified. [page 18 of the linked .pdf] :) )

Governor - Terry Goddard.  He's got the intelligence, experience, and wisdom to move Arizona out of the economic abyss that it's in.  And he's got the quiet fire necessary for dealing with the R extremists in the legislature who are less interested in serving Arizona than in adhering to a nihilist ideology.

State Senator (District 17) - David Schapira.  Focused on Tempe and Arizona's education system.  He has an established track record.  Will work "across the aisle" when doing so will help the district or Arizona's students.  Will fight like hell when doing so will help the district or Arizona's students.

State Representative (District 17) - Ed Ableser and P. Ben Arredondo.  Both have been teachers and community activists in Tempe/South Scottsdale, Ed for most of a decade and Ben for *many* decades.  Ed is the more liberal of the two (Ben being a reformed former Republican), but both are totally focused on their constituents (Yes, there is definitely a pattern in my picks, and it isn't just the partisan affiliation.)

Secretary of State - Chris Deschene.  Will fight for the rights of all voters, not just his party's.  That fact alone puts him head and shoulders above his opponent, but he also brings an educational background that includes mechanical engineering and a law degree. 

Attorney General - Felecia Rotellini.  She's got the smarts, the integrity, and the tenacity to protect Arizonans from predators of all stripes, whether they are smuggling cartels or Wall Street fraudsters.

State Treasurer - Andrei Cherny.  A former assistant AG and an economics policy wonk extraordinaire, he is eminently qualified for the job of safeguarding Arizona's public monies.  The fact that, unlike his opponent, he isn't an indictment for financial fraud waiting to happen is just gravy.

Superintendent of Public Instruction - Penny Kotterman.  Career teacher, teacher trainer, school administrator, education policy advocate, for over 30 years.  Her opponent has spent most of the last two decades trying to destroy public education in Arizona.  'Nuff said.

Mine Inspector - Manuel Cruz.  He has the educational and professional background in mine safety that a job that is supposed to ensure the safety of miners *should* have.  Not in the pocket of industry lobbyists, unlike his opponent.

Corporation Commissioner - David Bradley and Jorge Luis Garcia.  Two former legislators with long and distinguished track records of fighting for their constituents.  Their opponents have long and not-so-distinguished track records of fighting for Big Business, no matter what state it is based in.  The Arizona Corporation Commission is meant to protect the interests of Arizonans by regulating and overseeing utilities, railroads, and securities in the state.  Bradley and Garcia are easy choices here.

Maricopa County Attorney - Michael Kielsky. He's a Libertarian, someone I would normally never vote for, but I always vote for the better candidate.  There's no Democrat on the ballot for this brief term (2 years instead of the normal 4) and the Republican on the ballot is openly allied with Joe Arpaio.  I've been told by some people who are more familiar than I am with Bill Montgomery (the Republican in question) that they think he will probably at least try to appear as neutral, but Arpaio spent hundreds of thousands on ads in the primary race, and incurred thousands more in fines for violating campaign finance laws for doing so.  Can you say "quid pro quo"?

I don't think Kielsky will win, but a strong showing could send a message to the Democrats who have all but given Montgomery a free pass.

Maricopa County Clerk of Courts - Sherry Williams.  Smart and energetic, with a BA in Political Science and a Masters in Information Systems.  She will bring the background and integrity that the clerk of *any* court should have, and that Maricopa County so desperately needs (a Maricopa County official elected countywide with some integrity?  Be still my beating heart...)

University Lakes Justice of the Peace - Meg Burton Cahill (no website available).  The retiring state senator has a master's degree in Public Administration and a strong background in the law from her time on the Senate's Judiciary Committee.  She will make a fine addition to the Maricopa County bench, where her wisdom and experience will stand her in good stead against the pressures that can/will be brought to bear on folks in that position.  Ask the current holder of the office - he was Joe Arpaio's "go-to guy" when he needed some sketchy warrants signed for his jihad against the county supes.

University Lakes Constable - No race, so no vote.  Joe Arredondo (R) will win.

Central Arizona Water Conservation District (aka - the Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project) - Arif Kazmi and Jim Holway.  Both have strong academic, professional and personal backgrounds in water resources management.  Both were among the five candidates endorsed by the Arizona Republic, and while the other endorsees of the AZRep are strong, these two are stronger and should be "double-shotted" in order to maximize their chances of election.  There is a slate of "Tea Party" candidates running to try to put the management of a major part of Arizona's water delivery system on an ideological basis, not a professional basis.  They should be completely shunned.  In a desert like central Arizona, water literally is life.

School Governing Board member, Scottsdale Unified #48 - I have absolutely no clue.  Decision by elimination time (and I may be doing the eliminated candidate a disservice, but this is the best I've got in this race):  Denny Brown (newby) and Dieter Schaefer (incumbent).  There is limited info available on the candidates that I could find in a quick search, but while I have some reservations (i.e. - Schaefer was the only candidate who responded to a questionnaire from the extreme RW organization The Center for Arizona Policy), but the third candidate, Pam Kirby. touts a resume that looks good (lots of PTO involvement) but seems to be more purely ideological than the others.  Plus the endorsement of Scottsdale City Council member Bob Littlefield didn't help.

Bond question, Scottsdale Unified #48 - Yes.  Over the short-term, the legislature cannot be counted on the fund the state's education system, whether for classroom needs or infrastructure needs.  Long-term, there could be legal ramifications because while relatively affluent districts like SUSD can use bonding to fund an adequate education system for their students, many poorer districts cannot.

City of Scottsdale Council Member - Ned O'Hearn, Linda Milhaven, and Wayne Ecton.  All three care deeply about Scottsdale and its future, and aren't tied to any particular ideology beyond that.  Dennis Robbins would have received my fourth vote if a fourth seat was up for election this time around, but he wasn't quite strong enough a candidate to make it into the top three.  Bob Littlefield...I like Bob personally, but I'd never vote for him.  He definitely is tied to that certain nihilist ideology that permeates the AZGOP, he just covers it with a "good ol' boy" facade.  Guy Philips is definitely not ready for prime time.  He doesn't hide his obeisance to ideological orthodoxy, but he doesn't even have the redeeming value of knowing that ideology well.  If he were elected to the Council, he'd need a staffer with cue cards set up in the back of the City Hall Kiva to tell him how to vote on issues.

The next set of issues concern City of Scottsdale ballot questions, info here.

City of Scottsdale Bond Questions 1 and 2 - Yes.  They're for infrastructure, and I'm a big fan of infrastructure.

Proposition 411 - NO.  A charter amendment further restricting the City's ability to use condemnation to acquire property.  Looks harmless on the surface (must adhere to state law, which is already required), but includes vague language like "all reasonable options have been exhausted."  A recipe for frivolous lawsuits.

Proposition 412 - NO.  A charter amendment intended to prevent the City from ever paying to participate in organizations like the Scottsdale Chamber of Commerce.  Part of Mayor Jim Lane's ongoing tiff with the CofC, possibly related to the fact that they didn't endorse him in 2008.  The charter is a document to define the structure of the City's government, not a tool for petty political retribution.

Proposition 413 - Close, but NO.  Currently, the City's charter allows citizens to petition the Council and requires the Council to consider any matters brought to its attention within 30 days, which can be difficult considering the timing (right before summer break) or complexity of some of the issues.  This charter amendment would remove the thirty day limit entirely.  My problem is with that.  Make it 45 or 60 days, but don't remove the obligation to hear matters in a timely manner.

Proposition 414 - Probable YES.  This charter amendment would clarify the duties of and separate the offices of the various City Charter Officers.  This one stems from the tendency in recent years to combine the offices of the City Manager and City Treasurer.  God help me for agreeing with the Lane/Littlefield clique on *anything*, but they're right on this one - the treasurer of any organization should be an independent officer, one whose oversight is as far up the org chart as is practicable.

It's not perfect, and it's a powerplay by the Lane/Littlefield clique, but when Lane installs a campaign contributor into the office of treasurer (and he will!), there will be a movement to put specific experience requirements into the charter for that particular job.

Proposition 415 - Probable YES.  A charter amendment to clarify that the Mayor and Council shall not have direct control of a City employee's hiring/firing, except for those who work directly for the Mayor and Council.

Proposition 416 - Probable YES.  A charter amendment that looks like a "housekeeping" measure clarifying how the Council may act/enact under specific circumstances.

Proposition 417 - Probable YES.  A charter amendment that looks to be a "housekeeping" measure related to the appointment and terms of judges on the City Court.

Judges for the Arizona Supreme Court, Court of Appeals - Division One, and Maricopa County Superior Court - I haven't heard of any of them, which is a characteristic that I want in judges.  Court judges are like baseball umpires - if you've heard of them, then they probably messed up big-time.  I won't be voting to retain/not retain any of them.

Statewide ballot propositions - Previously covered here.  Summary: NO on all measures proposed by the legislature, and YES on the one (Prop. 203, Medical Marijuana) sent to the ballot by the citizens.

Whew!

Later...

Recap of the LD17 Clean Elections debate

On Wednesday night, the Citizens Clean Elections Commission held its debate for the candidates in the LD17 races for state senate and state representative.

While only one candidate in each race is a Clean Elections candidate, all of the candidates were invited.  Most, but not all, took advantage of the opportunity to speak to the approximately 200 voters in attendance.

As pure theater, the senate debate was boring - only one candidate, State Representative David Schapira, showed up.

Anthony "Grandpa" Goshorn, the faux-Green write in candidate, was expected (the CCEC went so far as to print up a name tent for him) but he didn't appear at the forum.  He was in the audience, however. (working on obtaining pics) 

Republican candidate Wendy Rogers was a complete no-show, not even bothering to attend to watch the debate and meet with interested voters.

She put up a message on her Facebook page saying that "Voters OVERWHELMINGLY tell me they appreciate a candidate on their doorstep rather than having to take time to attend a forum to view a candidate from a distance."

I don't know what "distance" she is talking about - one could meet and greet any of the candidates present before and after the forum.

Of course, Rogers could have been pinned down and asked to explain her answer on this questionnaire from the Center for Arizona Policy.

When asked if she supported or opposed "Prohibiting abortion except when it is necessary to prevent the death of the mother," not only did she circle "Support," she expanded upon that answer by adding "Honestly, I do not support abortion even to prevent the unfortunate death of the mother."

Ummmm...yeah.  That one doesn't even fit in with the mainstream of her own party, much less the mainstream of Tempe and south Scottsdale.

In any event, the candidate "debate" became a conversation between Schapira and Russ Knocke, the moderator of the event (See above pic)

Schapira used his time to lay out his political resume and past accomplishments and his vision for the future.

His trademark issue and political passion, both historically and in his future plans, is protecting and strengthening Arizona's education system.

Calling the Republican majority in the legislature "pennywise and pound foolish," a line that he borrowed from Republican John Kavanagh, chair of the House Appropriations Committee, he sharply criticized the way that the Rs have [not] handled the state's fiscal crisis, particularly in regards to education funding (Arizona has a "terrible model on how to run an education system") and health care (the lege has "raised the bar" on AHCCCS eligibility when ever-more people need its safety net).*

* - Don't fret R readers, Kavanagh is still drinking the Kool-Aid - within days of urging during a committee meeting that the state not to be "pennywise and pound foolish" he voted to cut education funding, close state parks that were a net revenue generator, and end KidsCare.

The House debate was far livelier.  Six candidates - Democrats Ben Arredondo and Ed Ableser, Republicans Don Hawker and Steve May, Green Gregor Knauer, and Libertarian Damian Trabel - were there, though only Ableser has accepted Clean Elections funding.

While Knauer and Trabel laid out their respective positions well (or not-so-well, depending), the debate became focused on the differences between the Democratic and Republican candidates.

Even at that, most of the open animosity was between Ableser and May.

Hawker spent most of his time piping up to blame all of AZ's (and the country's) ills on abortion and "unbridled liberalism" and Arredondo spent his time focusing on Arizona's devastated education system and "jobs, jobs, jobs."

I'll give Hawker credit for one thing - he may be a one-issue candidate, but he is focused enough on that one issue to turn any answer to any question into a diatribe against abortion.

And "diatribe" is the right word too - when CCEC puts up the video recording of the debate, watch it.  He uses lines like "scissors removing the brains of babies" and does so with a straight face.

Ben Arredondo spent his time on one thing, too - talking about what he will do in office if elected.  Like Schapira (and Ableser, too), the career teacher and public servant will be focused on education.  He also pledged to work "across the aisle" for the benefit of the district, teaming up with Republicans on issues that they can agree on.  That is something that Arredondo may be uniquely qualified to do, as the former school board and Tempe City Council member, and former Republican, has a long history of working for real world solutions for real world problems.

However focused those two were, the featured attraction in the House debate was Steve May constantly lobbing rhetorical bombs (and personal insults) at Ed Ableser.

Apparently, May must believe that Ableser is the one who uncovered his involvement with the burgeoning AZGOP/sham Green candidates scandal,

I don't really know who did figure out May's involvement, but since May wasn't exactly hiding his involvement with some of the suspect candidates, his involvement could have been uncovered by almost anyone.

Anyway, May started right in on Ableser, claiming that Ableser's biggest failing as a legislator is his unwillingness to work for "with" the Republican majority in a bipartisan manner.

Ummm - I can state unequivocally that the R caucus doesn't want any Democrats to work with them.  During 2009's budget dust-up when the Rs couldn't get enough votes from their own caucus to pass a budget, attempting to "work with" Democrats meant that the Governor, President of the State Senate, and Speaker of the State House met in the Speaker's office and proceeded to call in each member of the D caucus to *tell* them to vote for their budget.  It didn't work.

May kept taking his shots at Ableser, until he was not-so-subtly schooled by Ben Arredondo, who, to the approval of most of the audience members, pointed out that he was there to talk about his vision and candidacy, not to take swipes at the other candidates.  After that. May cut back (but didn't cut out) the direct attacks.

According to May, the best reason to vote for him is that he is a Republican, and would be part of the majority party. 

Seriously, that was the best he had to offer.

Ableser took his time to point out his record of accomplishment and advocacy for the district. 

Among other things, he supports broadening the state's tax base (the sales-tax centered model currently used by Arizona is "very archaic"), using incentives to push entrepeneurship in Arizona, especially around "green" and solar technology, and, of course, buttressing the state's education system.

Finally, a curious thing occurred after the forum was over -

From the stage, May started barking at fellow blogger Randy, the author of Dry Heat Democrat.  Not sure why.  Randy barked back (a little) in response, but it didn't escalate beyond that.  I'll leave it to him to tell the story on his blog.  It should be up in a day or two.

Interested voters can go to the website of the Clean Elections Commission to view the debate online (once the CCEC posts the video record)

More pics from the forum -

Left:  The House candidates (L to R): Ableser, Arredondo, Hawker, Knauer, May, and Trabel.

Left:  The crowd, pic taken during the break between the two debates, when everybody could stand and stretch their legs.

Later...

Note: apologies for the formatting of this post.  Apparently Blogger doesn't like it when you put multiple pics into one post...

Pics from the LD17 Clean Elections debates

Will do a more complete recap tomorrow (I need to get some sleep now), but here are a few pics...

Ed Ableser and Ben Arredondo, Democratic candidates for LD17 House, prior to the debate

David Schapira, Democratic candidate for LD17 State Senate, prior to his "debate" (more on that in a minute)...

Schapira and his opponents Wendy Rogers (R) and Anthony Goshorn (G*), with Rogers and Goshorn disguised as empty chairs.  Seriously, neither one showed up.  Apparently Rogers notified organizers prior to the event, even though originally she was expected to appear, but Goshorn was a pure no show (check out the name tent next to Schapira's). 

Well, not a *pure* no show - he was in the audience.  Just not on the stage.

All of the House candidates who appeared at the debate.  From left to right: Ed Ableser, Ben Arredondo, Don Hawker (R), Gregor Knauer (G), Steve May (R), and Damian Trabel (Libertarian)

Arredondo making a point.

Later...

Early ballot time - 2010 primary

Early voting has started, and those voters who have signed up for the Pernanent Early Voting List or have specifically requested a mail ballot for this election should have received their ballot already (or will receive it within the next few days.)

If you are not on the PEVL list or haven't requested a ballot for this specific election, you can download the sign up form for the PEVL here or request a ballot for a single election here.  The latest date to request an early ballot for the August primary is August 13.

My ballot is a Democratic one, specific to CD5/LD17/Maricopa County/University Lakes Justice Precinct, and can be found here. (Just for giggles, the Republican ballot for the same area is here; the Libertarian ballot is here; and the Green ballot is here.)

While I have determined who to vote for in the races where there are contests, I won't list those choices here.  All of the Democratic candidates are excellent choices (one of the advantages to being a Democrat in a state that is so dominated by Republicans is that anyone running as a D is someone who takes public service seriously) and I'll proudly support the eventual winners in the general election.

The candidates on my ballot, and their campaign websites, are (in the order listed on the ballot, not my personal preference.):

US Senate (vote for one)

Randy Parraz
John Dougherty
Cathy Eden
Rodney Glassman


U.S. Representative (CD5)

Harry Mitchell


Governor of Arizona

Terry Goddard


State Senator (LD17)

David Schapira


State Representative (LD17) (vote for two)

Ed Ableser
Ben Arredondo


Arizona Secretary of State (vote for one)

Sam Wercinski
Chris Deschene


Arizona Attorney General (vote for one)

Felecia Rotellini
David Lujan
Vince Rabago


Arizona State Treasurer

Andrei Cherny


Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction (vote for one)

Jason Williams
Penny Kotterman


Arizona Mine Inspector

Manuel Cruz


Arizona Corporation Commission (vote for two)

Renz Jennings
David Bradley
Jorge Luis Garcia


Clerk of the Maricopa County Superior Court

Sherry Williams


Justice of the Peace, University Lakes Justice Precinct (vote for one)

Meg Burton Cahill (no campaign webpage that I could find, but her state senate page is here)
Kathy Hayden


One of the more interesting races is one that isn't on my ballot - the race between Republicans Rick Romley and Bill Montgomery to serve out the remaining 2+ years of Andrew Thomas' term as Maricopa County Attorney.  No D is running for the spot, preferring to save up their campaigning energies for 2012.

The race there has boiled down to Romley's professionalism versus Montgomery's Arpaio-ism.  In a general election contest, Romley would win in a walkover, but since the race will be decided by the R primary voters, anything could happen.

Updates on this and the other races as they become available.

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...

D17 Legislators guide important bills through to the Governor's desk

After one of the most contentious legislative sessions on record, the Democratic contingent to West Washington can look upon their accomplishments this year with a little pride.

State Senator Meg Burton Cahill and State Representatives David Schapira and Ed Ableser each had bills reach the Governor's desk, awaiting her signature.

They include -

SB1232 (Burton Cahill), conforming Arizona's civil rights laws with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act

HB2462 (Ableser), reining in predatory towing companies

HB2080 (Schapira), "Helps students with chronic health problems by expanding parents’ choices of health professionals to certify their children need special accommodations to complete their coursework." (Quoting from a press release)

HB2401 (Schapira), expanding the teacher student loan forgiveness program (originally to encourage/aid future math, science, and special ed teachers) to include students who are elementary ed teachers in areas that have been determined to have a shortage of teachers.

Thanks for their hard work and congratulations on their successes go out to all three members of LD17's delegation.

From the "you can't make this stuff up" department - Burton Cahill's bill, SB1232, was pretty innocuous, almost a "technical corrections" bill, yet when it was passed by the Senate, it was opposed by John Huppenthal, a Republican candidate for State Superintendent of Public Instruction. Somewhat surprising for someone who wants to be in charge of educating Arizona's children - most people either have a disabled child in their family or know someone who does. His vote can only serve to tick off a significant part of the education community, a community whose support he is seeking in his attempt to change offices.

According to one source, it turns out that Huppenthal wasn't opposed to the content of the measure. According to that source, Huppenthal told an advocate for the disabled community that he voted against the bill because he personally disliked the Senator who sponsored the bill, Meg Burton Cahill.

That's pretty petty, even by the abysmally low standards of the GOP caucus in the lege.

Of course, this is the same John Huppenthal who stole signs opposing his candidacy and pushed around an elderly Democratic activist in 2008 (he faced charges, but was acquitted...by a Republican judge).

Being merely "petty" may qualify as a good day for Huppenthal...

Later...