Mitchell lead widening in CD5

From the DCCC (link added) -

Mitchell Leads Schweikert by 7 in New AZ-05 Poll

A new Benenson Strategy Group poll shows Representative Harry Mitchell leading Republican challenger David Schweikert by 7 percent. Mitchell leads Schweikert 46 percent to 39 percent. Conducted October 5-7, the poll surveyed 400 likely voters and has a 4.9 percent margin of error.

This news, on top of the news that Terry Goddard has closed to within 3 percentage points (among all voters) of Jan Brewer in a recent poll, drives home the point that while Democrats in AZ have made strides, getting out the vote will be vital for the next 3 weeks.

Volunteer to help Arizona.  Volunteer to help elect Democrats.

Schweikert: nothing else is working, so it's time to lie

In his never-ending quest to gain a seat in Congress, Republican David Schweikert has gotten desperate -

He's loaned his campaign hundreds of thousands of dollars of his own money (much of it from his neighborhood-destroying vulture investing) to his own campaign...

He's gone juvenile, spending money on "counter" signs to be posted next to Harry Mitchell's signs, and then crying foul when the Mitchell signs are moved after he put up the insults.

All of this has put him close to or ahead of Mitchell in various polls (some of questionable provenance, but even the credible polls put him close to Mitchell), but none of his games or the hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of outside group (RNCC or corporate) spending has put him over the top.

So now he is resorting to outright lies.



In the video, Schweikert claims that Mitchell has voted for Obama-era budget bills repealing the Bush-era tax cuts on capital gains that Schweikert supports.

Yet, Mitchell hasn't.  In fact, he is cited in this Chicago Tribune article from March 2009 as one of the Ds standing in the way of the Obama budget, standing in the way because of the rollback of specific tax cuts.

Mitchell has also voted against Obama-era (2009 or later) budget and appropriation bills here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

When he's voted against budget/appropriations bills, he has consistently cited concerns over D.C. spending, and just as consistently, he has voted against tax increases, even ones that were just a rollback of Bush-era tax cuts targeted at the wealthy.

That's just the truth, something that David Schweikert has little use for, apparently.

Thanks to Tedski at Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion for the heads-up on this, and the history lesson.

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...

The tone-deafness of the Schweikert campaign continues: Palin supports Schweikert

And while some may take the following post as an argument that Schweikert shouldn't accept Palin's support, let me be clear - I think that they're a matched set.

Just not in a good way.  :)

From the Phoenix Business Journal -

Palin steps up campaign against Giffords, Kirkpatrick, Mitchell

Sarah Palin is picking up her online and fundraising efforts on behalf of three Republicans looking to unseat incumbent Arizona Democrats in November.

Palin is urging her supporters to get behind David Schweikert, Paul Gosar and Jesse Kelly in their bids against U.S. Reps. Harry Mitchell of Tempe, Ann Kirkpatrick of Flagstaff and Gabrielle Giffords of Tucson.

Palin has targeted 20 races nationwide where she wants to help Republican challengers.

Sarah Palin may actually be one of the national Republican/tea party figures best-suited to help Schweikert's campaign -

- She quit partway through her only term as governor of Alaska in order to pursue a more lucrative career as a public speaker and would-be Republican king- (or queen-)maker; Schweikert quit partway through his only term as Maricopa County Treasurer in order to pursue a more lucrative career as a Club for Growth-financed candidate for Congress.

- Her partial term as governor was one beset by scandals and ethics complaints; Schweikert's partial term as treasurer was characterized by professionalism and ethics issues, too.

- Her investments include (or perhaps "included", some sources indicate that she divested from them - after people noticed and started asking her about them) making money off of the misery in the Sudan; Schweikert makes money off of the misery of Valley homeowners who are underwater with their mortgages.


To sum up: 

Palin and Schweikert are more focused on their personal careers and enrichment than on public service.

Palin and Schweikert go through life relatively free of the burdens of professionalism and integrity.

And Palin and Schweikert are ruthless in their acquisition of personal wealth.


Yup.  They're perfect for each other.

Vote for Harry Mitchell for Congress.

Later...

Schweikert campaign dusting off old tricks and gimmicks

Perhaps feeling the heat from the success of the recent video released by Harry Mitchell's campaign showing a number of Republicans from CD5 publicly expressing support for the Democratic incumbent, the Schweikert campaign has released its own video showing bipartisan supporters for their candidate.

...Well, make that bipartisan "supporter" (singular) because there is only one person in the video.

Anyway, when Mitchell first ran for Congress in 2006, a similar group of Republicans stepped forward to support the Tempe icon, and then-Congressman JD Hayworth responded with a single Democratic supporter, Craig Columbus, the 2002 D nominee in CD5.  Columbus ran a high $ and ugly primary campaign while virtually rolling over in the general election.  He has been characterized by one long-time Democrat in the district (not me - his candidacy was before my time as an active Democrat) as a "Republican in everything but name."

The "Democrat" recruited by the Schweikert campaign is similarly suspect.  His name is Charlie Harrison, a noted gay rights activist and a self-proclaimed "very liberal" Democrat.

After that, however, his political activities and associations become a little murky.

In the 1990s, he was indicted for perjury as a result of his involvement in the infamous AZScam scandal (Phoenix New Times article here).  Maybe not the best person for Schweikert, with questions surrounding his own ethics, to associate with.

He has contributed money to various political candidates and causes over the last decade.  Some of the recipients of his largesse included long-time Latino activist Alfredo Gutierrez during his 2002 run for the D nomination for governor and a 2006 campaign against an anti-LGBT ballot question.  He's also contributed to Republicans Trent Franks, Roberta Voss, and Sue Gerard.  Voss and Gerard I can sort of understand - they're relatively moderate by the standards of the AZGOP.  But Franks?  Trent freakin' Franks???

More recently, he has been involved in a tiff with the U.S. Forest Service over some "recreational residences" in the Tonto National Forest near Carefree (AZ Republic background here; Phoenix New Times coverage here).  Some of his anger with Mitchell may stem from Harrison's inability to persuade any of AZ's delegation to influence the Forest Service to ignore federal law and its own rules regarding the cabins.  Harrison has also lobbied Franks and Senators Jon Kyl and John McCain to no avail on his pet issue.

However, he has targeted his public anger to the sole Democrat that he has contacted, Harry Mitchell, and has uttered nary a peep about the Republicans.

His association with Schweikert is curious, too. 

Schweikert is running as a generic Republican/tea party candidate espousing a platform that is anti-choice, anti-education, anti-social safety net and worse, yet Harrison supports Schweikert while refering to himself as a "liberal."

And he calls on other "liberals" to vote against "liberal" Harry Mitchell.


Umm...yeah.


Two points here -

1.  I am a liberal Democrat and proud of it.  Anybody who has read this blog knows that.  I am also a fan of Harry Mitchell and proud of it.  Anybody who has read this blog also knows that.  But I have to say, Harry Mitchell is no liberal. 

He's a career public servant.  Throughout his career, from his decades of teaching high school in Tempe to his terms in Congress representing CD5, he has focused on representing the best interests of the people he has served.  I may not have always agreed with some of his votes and positions, but have always had absolutely no doubt that he tries to do the right thing.

He isn't a liberal, but he is a decent man.  Instead of attacking Mitchell for that, Republicans (and liberal-on-one-issue folks like Harrison) should support him as an example of something that ALL elected officials should aspire to.

2. David Schweikert may be a decent man at heart (the jury is still out on that.  Vulture investing will do that), but he's no liberal, or even a moderate who would be acceptable because he is a decent public servant (using public office to give a no-bid contract to a friend will do that).


Harrison may proclaim himself to be a "very liberal Democrat" but the inconsistencies in his campaign contributions (Trent freakin' Franks???) and his support for a candidate who will actively work against him and the causes that he supports over a single personal grievance only speak to Harrison's naivete (a description of him from the New Times' piece on his involvement with AZScam).

Personally, I think he is being petty, but since I haven't met Harrison, I'll stick with the description of people who have met him.

Later...

CD5 a dead heat in the latest polling

From The Hill -

There's new evidence to support Democrats' claims that Rep. Harry Mitchell (D-Ariz.) is running a strong reelection campaign.


A new poll shows the two-term incumbent leading former Maricopa County Treasurer David Schweikert (R) — albeit by a single point.

Mitchell had 45 percent support to 44 percent for Schweikert, with 6 percent for Libertarian Nick Coons and 5 percent undecided, in an internal poll obtained by the Ballot Box.

With the usual caveats about internal polls, these latest numbers appear to be in line with what I've seen and heard anecdotally while walking, knocking, and talking in the district.

Compared to earlier polling (covered in the linked article), Schweikert's support (44% now vs. 46% then) has stagnated while Mitchell's has risen (45% now vs. 38% then).

At least some of this may be a bit of "blowback" in response to the Schweikert campaign's 60 Plus Association's carpetbombing of District TV screens with their anti-Mitchell TV spot. (I can't remember the last time I could watch an entire hour without seeing the spot at least twice).

People are just sick of the shameless attacks on Mitchell without Schweikert saying how he would be better for the district than Mitchell.

Oh, and more than a few have noticed that the guy who gives his pay raises to charity (Mitchell) is being criticized by the guy who has made a mint off of vulturing foreclosed homes, undercutting neighborhood standards, and serving eviction notices to a 12-year-old.

Schweikert is running as a generic Republican in a district as geographically compact and as familiar with Mitchell as AZ-CD5 and Schweikert has also developed a credibility problem.  It's still early, and he's got time to steer his campaign away from the shoals of electoral irrelevance, but early ballots drop in approximately two weeks. 

He's got that long to get it together, but that would mean deviating from the script handed to him from on high (GOP pooh-bahs like John "Tan Man" Boehner).  He's got some serious problems.

...It's 10:24 and there's that ad again (Channel 15).  Gotta love industries with cash to burn - local TV stations need the revenue.

Congressman Harry Mitchell - "Advancing Research"

I know that in the last post, I mentioned that I don't normally post press releases verbatim, before doing so.  I'm doing it again, but letters from Congressman Harry Mitchell are something that I've always made an exception for.

From an email -

Degenerative diseases are devastating. We all have someone in our lives who suffers from a chronic and potentially life-threatening disease like Alzheimer’s, Lou Gehrig’s, Huntington’s, Parkinson’s, cancer or even diabetes. These relationships in my own life have pushed me to strongly support cutting-edge medical research so that we can discover treatments for the millions of Americans who suffer from a wide array of diseases and conditions.


One of the first things I did after taking office in 2007 was take to the floor of the House and urge my colleagues to overturn the stem cell research ban. Congress rarely gets an opportunity to offer hope to the millions of Americans who suffer from these diseases; however, last year we were given the opportunity to invest in science and ethical research. On March 9, 2009, President Obama issued an Executive Order to allow federal funding of human stem cell research, including human embryonic stem cell research. I thought this was a great step in the right direction because many scientists believe embryonic stem cells hold greater promise than adult stem cells for further scientific breakthroughs which will advance research on many devastating diseases.

Recently, the issue of stem cell research has been reintroduced to the national discussion as a result of a temporary injunction that was placed on federal stem cell research by a federal court in August.

Although the injunction has since been lifted by a higher federal court, I have joined on as a cosponsor to the Stem Cell Research Advancement Act of 2009, H.R. 4808. This bill would expand the lot of available stem cells for research by codifying that federal research projects may use stem cells regardless of the date on which the stem cells were derived. I am proud to be a supporter of this bill, and will continue to strongly support stem cell research to help discover treatments for a wide array of diseases and conditions.

As always, I look forward to being able to provide you with regular updates and continue our dialogue in support of advancing important medical research.

Sincerely,

Harry

Later...

David Schweikert has a remarkably low opinion of AZRep reporters

...Of course, he probably has an even lower opinion of wiseass bloggers. :)

From YouTube -




I was going to title this post "Whatthehell was he thinking?", but I understand that Schweikert was on a radio talk show of the "preaching to the choir" variety.  Still, he is smart enough to know that *nothing* that is recorded (video or audio) ever really goes away.

Should make for an interesting conversation when he and Congressman Harry Mitchell sit down with the Rep's editorial board...

When is age a factor in a candidate's viability? If you ask Republicans, only when the candidate is a Democrat

Has Greg Patterson of Espresso Pundit started working directly for the Schweikert campaign (if he has, it's not obvious from the campaign's most recent filings with the FEC)?  Or has he chosen to turn his blog into a Schweikert campaign press release outlet? 

I, and most Democratic bloggers, for that matter, happily republish campaign press releases, but when I do so, I always clearly identify them as such.

Patterson never publishes such a disclaimer.

Earlier this week, he published a post declaring the race over in CD5 based on the results of what was essentially a third party-funded internal poll.  This suspect poll declared Schweikert ahead in the race by 5 percentage points.  Patterson focused only on the percentages, not the questionable methodology of the company that conducted the poll.

He also rather blithely ignored the fact that in late October 2006, a SurveyUSA poll showed then-Congressman JD Hayworth ahead of Mitchell by three percentage points.

Mitchell ended up winning the race by slighly more than 8000 votes.

He backed that one up with a post published on Sunday.  Perhaps he was simply regurgitating Schweikert campaign's wishful thinking, or perhaps he is doing his part to add a little reality to some of the lies that the Rs spewed about health care reform last year, but he took the initiative to become a self-designated "death panel."

He placed a "Do Not Resuscitate" directive on Harry Mitchell and his political career.

His primary concern was Harry's age, 70.

Perhaps Patterson *is* correct in his insinuation, and Mitchell is too old for public service, but then that would then bring up another point -

Harry Mitchell, date of birth: July 18, 1940

John McCain, date of birth: August 29, 1936

Guess which one is running for a six-year term, and which one is running for a two-year term?

Fun with campaign signs

It hasn't even been a week, and the Schweikert campaign dirty tricks have already started...

Sighted on the northeast corner of 48th St. and Chandler Boulevard today -

And in case anyone questions the source of the signs...

There were others, calling Mitchell "union owned" and more.  The ones I saw were also located in the 48th St. corridor.

This technique, putting up "counter" or "insult" signs next to an opposition candidate's signs, is hardly a new one, but it had fallen into some disfavor over the last few election cycles.  It cropped up a little during the primary season, and with this, it's evident that certain campaigns are digging deep into the bag of dirty tricks (more on that tomorrow).

It's generally a waste of money because the primary audience for them has already made their choice.  In other words, it's "preaching to the choir" time.  In addition, in the case of the above sign, most undecided voters won't know who "Pelosi" is, or why being associated with "Pelosi" is supposed to be a bad thing (though I happen to think it is a good thing, but I'm just a wiseass liberal blogger :) ).

It's rather telling that Schweikert has started his general election campaign with dirty tricks with signs coordinated "coincidentally timed"** with Americans for Prosperity television attacks on Harry Mitchell.  Most campaigns try to start off on a positive note, trying to educate voters on why they should vote *for* their candidate, not why they should vote *against* their opposition.

However, the Schweikert platform mainly consists of "tax cuts for the wealthy and no regulations for corporations," which aren't exactly strong planks in an area as economically distressed as Arizona.  As such, he has no recourse but to go negative early in the general election cycle.

Look for more stunts like this one or last cycle's mailer where Schweikert claimed to have the endorsement of the Arizona Republic.  He *had* received such an endorsement.

For another race.

Years before.


Anyway, I suppose I have to give the Schweikert campaign some credit -"Pelosi's Lap Dog" may not be the truth, but it is probably more beneficial to his campaign than the actual truth -

"CD5's Champion."


** = The AFP spots are "independent expenditures" and cannot be coordinated with a candidate committee.  Given the lead time on both creating signs and TV spots, the timing of both the signs and the TV spots could reasonably inspire some raised eyebrows.  However, suspicions aren't direct knowledge that AFP and the Schweikert campaign coordinated the roll out of both.

KNXV-TV (Phoenix channel 15) coverage here.

Billionaire wingers from New York trying to buy elections in Arizona

Since Tuesday's primary results came in, showing David Schweikert to be the Republican nominee in CD5, television viewers have been inundated with ads deriding Democrats in general and Representatives Harry Mitchell and Ann Kirkpatrick in particular. 

The spots are the product of a Republican front organization named "Americans for Prosperity." (AFP)(The spot specifically targeting Mitchell and Kirkpatrick is here.  I won't embed it here, but will be referring to it later. :) )

AFP is dedicated to protecting the short-term financial interests of large corporations and the ultra-wealthy, organizing and funding campaigns against health care reform, efforts to address climate change, tobacco regulations, balanced state budgets, and anything resembling a social safety net (like Social Security).  It has also played a big part in funnelling money and direction to the tea party movement within the Republican Party.

As this article from The New Yorker documents, AFP is the brainchild of David Koch who, with his brother Charles, owns almost all of Koch Industries, one of the country's biggest polluters (hence their opposition to industry/environmental regulations).  Aside from AFP, the Koch brothers are literally two of the biggest contributors to Republican/corporate causes, donating approximately $100 million over the years.

That's all just background to the latest attack ads that they are bombing Arizonans with.

The spot that targets Harry Mitchell and Ann Kirkpatrick specifically has, shall we say, a rather "weak" relationship with the truth (focusing on the Mitchell-related stuff) -

Lie:  The spot refers to Mitchell as a "Washington liberal."

Reality: Mitchell was born and raised in Tempe.  He married his high school sweetheart there and has lived in the same house in Tempe for almost 50 years.  He taught at Tempe High for 28 years.  He served Tempe (and Scottsdale and the rest of CD5) as a member of the City Council, Mayor, State Senator, and Congressman for almost 40 years.

Reality: Harry Mitchell is hardly a "liberal" (a fact that occasionally infuriates actual liberals in CD5, like yours truly :) ).  Don't take my word for it - the liberal group Americans for Democratic Action graded Mitchell's voting record as 60% liberal, with the average Democratic grade as 85% and fellow AZers Pastor and Grijalva at 100%.  Mitchell is one of an ever-shrinking group in Congress - the moderates.


Lie: When Harry Mitchell voted in support of the health care reform, he voted for something that will cost a trillion dollars,balloon the federal deficit, limit medical choices, and gut Medicare.

Reality: HCR will reduce the federal deficit by $143 million, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.

Reality: According to WebMD, HCR doesn't limit choice any more than the current system does.

Reality: According to the AARP (hardly a partisan organization), HCR actually strengthens Medicare by, among other things, reducing prescription costs for seniors.

Reality:  David Schweikert, the AFP-supported Republican candidate in CD5, is actually the candidate in the race who supports Republican Representative Paul Ryan's plan for privatizing Social Security and ending Medicare.


Lie (or fib, at least): Arizonans "overwhelmingly" oppose HCR.

Reality: They are citing a poll from Rasmussen Reports.  Rasmussen is known for being somewhat biased and partisan, favoring Republican positions in their polling results. (OK, if the RNC decided to say that Magellan and centuries of scientific observations are wrong and the world is actually flat, Rasmussen would come out with a poll that says that 70% of Americans agree...but I digress :) ).

Reality: More objective polling organizations, such as Gallup, show that the country is sharply divided on the issue.


Lie: The spot claims that Mitchell votes for the positions and interests of Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Democratic leadership, ahead of the interests of Arizonans.

Reality: As this Washington Post study shows, Mitchell is the sixth-most independent member of Congress, voting with his party's leadership less than 80% of the time.  He's easily the most independent member of the AZ delegation, Republican or Democrat.


...OK, that's just the wonky, facts-centered stuff.

The juicy, gossipy stuff from analyzing the ad is this -

One of the actors in the spot (pic from the spot below), Greg from Scottsdale (I think)

is "sort of" well known within local tea party circles -

Not just a paid demonstrator/actor he. 

He's a true believer and has a website where he offers to "coach" interested folks on living his philosophy...over the phone...at $45 per hour.

Gotta pay for the photoshopped photos of President Obama in white-face somehow...

AFP and the Koch brothers may think this guy and David Schweikert are typical CD5ers, but they lens through which they view Arizona is a rather long one (Oklahoma, D.C., and NYC) and rather scratched.

Of course, with Schweikert's penchant for vulture investing, picking the bones of desperate Arizona homeowners, Schweikert is probably what they *hope* the typical CD5er is like.

Harry Mitchell, with his lifetime in and dedication to Arizona, is far more representative of CD5.

Congressman Harry Mitchell - Renewing Arizona's Economy

From an email from Congressman Harry Mitchell -

Dear [cpmaz]

Since coming to Congress, I have been working to improve our nation’s energy policy by making investments in clean, green American-made energy, such as solar and wind power. These investments will not only help meet our energy needs, but also be a major and sustainable boost to Arizona’s economy.


In 2008, I successfully fought to extend the 30-percent solar investment tax credit to help our state’s solar industry grow and create jobs. With the help of solar tax credits and grants, Arizona Public Service and Abengoa Solar are developing the world's largest solar energy plant outside Gila Bend. The Solana solar generating station will create an estimated 1,500 jobs and provide clean, emission-free energy for 70,000 homes. Solana is expected to stimulate an estimated $1 billion in local economic development.

I believe that energy policies must shift our focus away from foreign petroleum imports and dirty fuels like coal, towards clean, domestically abundant alternative energies. That’s why last year, I opposed the “cap and trade” bill, the American Clean Energy and Security Act, because instead of investing in carbon-neutral energies like solar, the measure would have doubled down America’s reliance on coal. I believe this was a step backward at a time when it is so vitally important for us to move forward. I was also concerned about a provision that would give the federal government power to overrule Arizona’s decisions about where we choose to place our power lines.

Nevertheless, I believe that we still need to work to find clean, alternative domestic sources of energy. I supported the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act because, in part, it makes significant investments in our nation's alternative energy infrastructure through both tax incentives and competitive grants. This investment will create more than a half a million green jobs dedicated toward moving America forward. Since coming to Congress, I have been working to improve our nation’s energy policy, by making investments in clean, green American-made energy, such as solar and wind power. These investments will not only help meet our energy needs, but also be an economic boon to our Arizona economy.

I have also supported increased energy efficiency. In 2007, I backed the first increase in fuel efficiency standards in more than a generation, raising federal standards to 35 mpg. I also supported extending personal tax credits to individuals for solar panels on their homes as well as expanded tax credits for people who buy hybrid cars.

As always, I look forward to being able to provide you with regular updates and continue our dialogue in support of clean, renewable energy in the future.

Sincerely,

Harry

Later...

Harry Mitchell vs. GOPer challengers: Public Service vs. Mudslinging and Politics As Usual

Keeping up with the compare and contrast theme of yesterday's post on the call for a special session of the legislature...

First up, an email from Congressman Harry Mitchell on the boring, but near and dear to the lives of CD5 residents, subject of home foreclosures -

Dear [cpmaz],

Our housing crisis is real; it is widespread; and it has reached deep into our economy, affecting us all. Inaction is not a responsible option.


Last weekend, I hosted my second Home Foreclosure Assistance Workshop in Ahwatukee. Arizona continues to have one of the worst foreclosure rates in the nation. One out of every 189 housing units in Arizona received a foreclosure notice during the month of June. That means that over 14,000 homes in Maricopa County alone went into foreclosure last month and gives us the third-highest foreclosure rate in the country.

Arizona Republic: Homeowners facing mortgage woes seek help at seminar.

I have heard far too many stories from people who are experiencing financial trouble, and their mortgage servicers will not take their calls until they are at least three-months behind on their payments. They feel like they are getting the run around and they want someone to help answer their questions. They feel like there is no one on their side.

That’s why I’ve been working hard with my colleagues in Congress to address foreclosures head-on. At the center of most home foreclosures is a house that has lost a lot of value, so I’ve proposed new tax incentives for homebuyers to help stimulate the housing market here in Arizona and across the country. I’ve also backed legislation that would make it easier for folks to get loan modifications when they are upside-down on their mortgage, or to refinance even if they have little-to-no equity in their home.

Foreclosure Prevention & Survival Resource Center: Online center providing links to housing, financial and consumer protection agencies.

But there’s more to be done. I believe we need more extensive tax cuts to help spur home sales and a plan that will avoid rewarding bad actors.

I will continue to fight, tackling foreclosures and decreasing home values head on. I welcome you to call my office with any questions, concerns and to see if our caseworkers can help. As always, please feel free to contact my office by clicking here or by calling (480) 946-2411.

Sincerely,

Harry

Contrast Congressman Mitchell's efforts on behalf of his constituents with the antics of the various GOP "contenders" for a spot on November's ballot -
 
- Perennial candidate David Schweikert is the subject of yet another FEC complaint, this one over a hit piece that was mailed to CD5 R voters.  It doesn't have enough of a color contrast between the background and the "paid for by" disclaimer for that disclaimer to be readable.
 
- Tea Party-type Chris Salvino has sent out a similar hit piece, this one targeting Schweikert.  While the "paid for by" clause is pretty clear, it has other problems, as Greg Patterson at the Republican blog Espresso Pundit points out in this post.
 
From Patterson's post -

The piece is simple; it contains one fact that leads to one conclusion. Schweikert runs a vulture fund that preys on people, so he's wrong for Arizona. That's it.


There are only two problems with the piece and--unfortunately for Salvino--they are pretty big problems. First, the one fact on the piece is wrong. Schweikert operates a fund that buys properties--from BANKS. Hmm, that's not nearly as ominous. In fact, it ruins the entire point of hit piece. Dude, if you build a hit piece around ONE fact. That fact had better be true.

But that's not the real problem with this piece. The real problem is that Dr. Chris Salivino has no business mentioning investors or housing. That's because he opens the door for Schweikert to point out Salvino's disastrous financial history...bankruptcy, fraud, eviction notices and tax liens.

Court record regarding Salvino's bankruptcy/fraud issues here, and like the link to the hit piece above, courtesy Espresso Pundit.

- Ward himself is also sending out hit pieces, as Patterson pointed out in this post from July (Hey, I'm a registered Democrat.  I don't get the good stuff because I'm not on their mailing lists... :) ).  His piece was an attack on Schweikert in the "let's throw lots of stuff against the wall and see what sticks" school.
 
- Susan Bitter Smith, an industry lobbyist when she isn't moonlighting as a candidate for Congress, is the owner of a "consulting" firm that is working to override the concerns of Scottsdale residents regarding the height and density of buildings in downtown Scottsdale.  Either she has given up on winning the R nomination (a possibility) and doesn't mind alienating voters during an election year, or she figures that the campaign contributions she can wheedle out of developers will outweigh any lost votes.
 
During last month's Republican Congressional candidate forum sponsored by the Arizona Republic, something struck me as odd at the time, but I couldn't put specific words to it at the time, so I didn't write about it then. (The archived broadcast can be found on this page.)
 
Watching the mudslinging and disregard for the needs and opinions of the residents of CD5 emanating from the R candidates brought it into focus.
 
The few times that the candidates spoke about Mitchell directly or about what they had heard voters say about him, they said something in a pitying tone, along the lines of "his heart is in the right place" but he isn't conservative enough. 
 
The idea of a public official being a public servant seemed antithetical to their visions for themselves if they actually went on to win in November.
 
They've got no time or respect for people who view public service as an end in itself, not as a means to pursue an ideological agenda and personal aggrandizement.
 
Compare and contrast that with Mitchell's long career in public service, from nearly three decades as a high school teacher, through his terms on the Tempe City Council and as Mayor of Tempe, on to his four terms of service as the State Senator for Tempe and South Scottsdale, cuminating with his election to Congress in 2006.
 
Any questions on who I think people should vote for in November?

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.

Army suicides up; VA outreach down. Harry Mitchell wants answers

This week, from the Stripes Central blog at Stars and Stripes -

More soldiers killed themselves last month than any other month on record. There were 21 active-duty and 11 reserve soldier suicides in June, including seven in Iraq or Afghanistan, the Army reported on Thursday.


The news came just weeks after Gen. Peter Chiarelli told Congress that the Army was encouraged by a 30 percent drop in suicides among active-duty soldiers this year compared to last year at this time. Although he said there was more to do, he thought the decrease showed the Army's prevention efforts were working.

But this latest data reflects more of the same. Through the first six months of 2009, 88 active-duty soldiers committed suicide. For this year, that number is 80. The trend is most troubling among reserve component soldiers; those deaths jumped from 42 to 65.

On Wednesday, Arizona Congressman Harry Mitchell chaired a hearing of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee looking into the efforts of the Veterans Administration to reach out to veterans suffering from PTSD and other service-related disorders. (Air Force Times coverage here)

In his opening statement, Mitchell questioned why the VA had discontinued successful public announcements, especially during a period of rising need. 
 
He called for increased, not reduced, efforts to reach out to veterans suffering from long-term effects of their service.
 
From a press release -

The VA can't just sit back and wait for veterans to come to them. They need to go to the veterans."

 
 
 

Mitchell donates books to help a homeless shelter in Mesa

There are days when Congressman Harry Mitchell drives me nuts with some of his votes (FISA renewal from 2007 and 2008 still steams me) and positions (the feds shouldn't sue AZ over SB1070) but then there are the days when I am reminded that he is inarguably the best human being to represent Tempe and Scottsdale in Congress in, like, ever.

From ABC15.com -

U.S. Rep. Harry Mitchell donated 130 books he obtained from the Library of Congress to a homeless shelter in Mesa Wednesday.

A New Leaf's La Mesita Family Homeless Shelter, a non-profit organization, accepted the donation at the morning event.

"As a former teacher, I know how important it is to make sure our youth and families have the resources and supplies necessary for learning," said Mitchell. "A quality education is a priority in our local communities, and reading helps not only improve literacy, but also build fundamental skills for the future."

I'm sure that his would-be challengers in the Republican primary in CD5 will decry this as a sign that Mitchell is "too liberal."
 
I have to ask, however -
 
When did working to improve the lives of one's constituents become an ideological position, and when did being a decent human being become an unacceptable trait in elected officials?
 
Note: financial contributions to A New Leaf can be made here.
 

Breaking news: Federal Government Sues AZ Over SB1070

....OK, OK, that is hardly breaking news - everybody expected a lawsuit was coming as soon as Jan Brewer signed Russell Pearce's anti-immigrant measure into law in late April.

How about this for a title?

Breaking News - Republicans Freak Out Over Federal Lawsuit To Block SB1070

...OK, OK, that's hardly surprising either.  They freak out whenever somebody calls them out on their garbage.

Anyway, on to the main part of the post.

From the Arizona Republic -

The Obama administration filed suit today against Arizona's landmark immigration law, alleging it was unconstitutional and a U.S. District Court judge should keep it from going into effect July 29.

The suit, filed in Phoenix, claims Arizona's new law "will conflict and undermine the federal government's careful balance of immigration enforcement priorities and objectives," and divert resources from the "dangerous aliens who the federal government targets as its top enforcement priority."

{snip}


Gov. Jan Brewer, who is named as a defendant along with the state, called the lawsuit "a terribly bad decision.

"It is wrong that our own federal government is suing the people of Arizona for helping to enforce federal immigration law. As a direct result of failed and inconsistent federal enforcement, Arizona is under attack from violent Mexican drug and immigrant smuggling cartels," Brewer said in a written statement. "Now, Arizona is under attack in federal court from President Obama and his Department of Justice.

Other reactions:

Congressman Harry Mitchell, from a press release -

"I am extremely disappointed that the Obama Administration has decided to file a lawsuit against Arizona to try to overturn our state's new immigration enforcement law, SB 1070. This is the wrong direction to go. I urged President Obama and his administration against doing so because I strongly believe their time, efforts and resources should be focused on securing our border and fixing our broken immigration system. Arizona needs Washington to take action, but a lawsuit is definitely not the kind of action we need.

Attorney General Terry Goddard, from a campaign press release -

"What we need are solutions, not lawsuits. Until we get real solutions, more states will turn to band-aid remedies to address this very important issue," said Attorney General Terry Goddard. "It is disappointing to see the federal government choosing to intervene in a state statute instead of working with Arizona to create sustainable solutions to the illegal immigration issue that our state and country so desperately need."

State Senator Russell Pearce (R-National Alliance) calls the lawsuit an "insult" to Arizonans.

U.S. Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl, from a McCain press release -

“The Obama Administration has not done everything it can do to protect the people of Arizona from the violence and crime illegal immigration brings to our state. Until it does, the federal government should not be suing Arizona on the grounds that immigration enforcement is solely a federal responsibility.”

My take:

The law is bad, the lawsuit is necessary, and any sort of immigration policy that doesn't address the underlying cause of immigration from Mexico to the U.S, the economics, whether it's Russell Pearce's version of "kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out" or some kind of "comprehensive reform" is doomed to fail.

And all of the blathering about "insults" and "attacks" and "secure the border first" won't change that.

BTW - The best quote about this wasn't actually said about this mess. 

In 2007, the late, great Molly Ivin wrote "Conservatives have been mad at the Supreme Court since it decided to desegregate the schools in 1954 and seen fit to blame the federal bench for everything that has happened since then that they don't like."

Look for Brewer, Pearce, and the other nativists suffer from fits of apoplexy if/when a federal judge blocks their police-state law.


The text of the legal filing can be found here, courtesy AZCentral.com

Congressman Harry Mitchell on the DISCLOSE Act

The DISCLOSE Act is the latest increment in campaign finance reform.

Mitchell's statement on the passage of the bill, and an explanation of his vote -

U.S. Rep. Harry Mitchell today released the following statement on H.R. 5175, the Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections (DISCLOSE) Act. Despite Mitchell's objection, the bill passed 219-206.

"In January, I was disappointed, and disagreed with, the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to roll back campaign finance provisions that have been set in law for over half a century - provisions which have sought to limit the role of large corporate, union and special interest money since the time of Teddy Roosevelt. Not only were these provisions supported overwhelmingly by bipartisan majorities in Congress and by Republican and Democratic Presidents, they had the support of a majority of the American people.

While I support campaign finance reform and its broader goals, I cannot support the DISCLOSE Act as it was written and amended. Ironically, as it wound its way through the House, the bill became an example of the same ugly special interest influence and backroom dealing it seeks to prevent. The House gave into special interests in order to garner enough votes for passage, and as a result, the legislation will not limit the role of all special interests equally. Instead, it creates carve-outs and exemptions for powerful, politically-favored organizations and political
advocacy groups, who account for some of the largest expenditures in modern-day political campaigns. If Congress is going to pass meaningful campaign finance reform legislation, it needs to improve the integrity of federal campaigns in a more comprehensive and equitable way. Unfortunately, this does not.

I support real campaign finance reform. As a former government teacher, I believe that we need to reduce the influence of corporations, unions and special interests in elections, and make sure that the American people have a voice, remain engaged and hold candidates and elected officials accountable. American elections should be decided by Americans, and for this to happen, there needs to be transparency and accountability in all campaign spending."

It should be noted that while I wholeheartedly agree with the reasons that he gave for voting against the bill, I think he should have voted for it anyway.

The bill may not be perfect, but it's a start. (Roll call vote here.)

Later...

Mitchell working for the next Greatest Generation

It was a long day at work today, and tomorrow will be just as long, so only a little copy and pasting tonight...

From an email from Congressman Harry Mitchell -

Yesterday marked the 66th anniversary of President Franklin D. Roosevelt signing the historic GI Bill into law. The original GI Bill was one of the greatest achievements of the 20th Century in America, giving our returning veterans a strong foothold in the economy and serving as the foundation for what became known as The Greatest Generation.

As the representative of 65,000 veterans, the Chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, and as a former teacher, I was honored to help renew the commitment to our veterans in 2008, by introducing a new GI Bill for the 21st Century, which was signed into law the same year.

The Post-9/11 Veterans Education Assistance Act extends the education benefits to all members of the military who have served on active duty since September 11, 2001, including activated reservists and National Guard.

Specifically, under the legislation,

•Service members returning from Iraq or Afghanistan receive up to four academic years of educational benefits, including stipends for housing and books.
•Veterans have up to 15 years after they leave active duty to use their education benefits.
•Veterans can use the Yellow Ribbon GI Education Enhancement Program, in which the federal government will match, dollar for dollar, any voluntary additional contributions to veterans from institutions whose tuition is more expensive than the maximum educational assistance provided under the Post-9/11 GI Bill.

This updated GI Bill is critical to strengthening the nation’s military. Not only will it helps attract high quality recruits who are interested in earning a higher education, but it will open doors for our veterans, strengthen our economy, and help military recruitment. Recently, the House Committee on Veterans Affairs reported that 233,424 veteran beneficiaries have taken advantage of the new GI Bill and have been paid to date.

I believe that we have a responsibility to serve those who bravely served us. We promised a higher education to our service members when they joined, and it is our duty to see they get it when they become veterans. The care of our veterans, servicemen and servicewomen are not just Democratic concerns or Republican concerns. They are American concerns.

To stay updated, please visit my website to learn more what I’m doing to honor those who have served us.

Sincerely,

Harry

Later...

"Defending Arizona" - Congressman Harry Mitchell on border and immigration issues

From an email to the Congressman's constituents -

Our state continues to pay a heavy and unfair price for the federal government’s failure to secure our borders and fix our broken immigration system. The federal government has a responsibility to act – it simply hasn't done so – and Arizona continues to shoulder the burden.

As you know, illegal immigration affects Arizona more than it does any other state – more than half of all illegal crossings over the U.S.-Mexico border happen here in Arizona. Specifically, here in the Valley, this has enabled smugglers and Mexican drug cartels to set up vast networks of drop houses, which operate as gateway stations for their illegal activities. The crime and violence associated with these drop houses is tragic and completely unacceptable. Upon being elected to Congress, I asked for a Government Accountability Office (GAO) investigation into federal efforts to identify and remove criminal aliens and combat drop houses. This has been a multi-year investigation, of which we expect the results to be presented this summer.

This is also why last month I introduced a bill with Republican Rep. Dana Rohrbacher of California to help secure our border. H.R. 5357, The Deploy National Guard Troops to the Border Act, would immediately deploy a minimum of an additional 3,000 National Guard troops to Arizona's border.

The National Guard has successfully assisted with border security in the past. Operation Jump Start, which concluded its mission in 2008 proved remarkably effective. Border-wide, the National Guard helped seize more than 1,080 vehicles used to transport drugs and/or illegal immigrants, more than 300,600 pounds of marijuana, and 5,060 pounds of cocaine.

I thought the National Guard was drawn down too quickly in 2008 and urged President Bush to extend the deployment of National Guard troops – to no avail. At the time, I offered legislation at the time to stop the draw down from happening, but it was defeated. I’ve also urged President Obama on multiple occasions to send additional National Guard troops to the border and teamed up with Republican Rep. Brian Bilbray of California last year to secure millions of dollars in additional funding for security improvements at the border.

While I welcome the President’s recent announcement that he will be sending an additional 1,200 National Guard troops to the border, I believe we need much more. That is why I hope Congress will take the next step by passing our bill while working on a more comprehensive, permanent fix.

Arizonans should have their voices heard in this debate and recent action taken by the state reflects Arizonans’ ongoing frustration with the federal government’s failure to enact tough, realistic immigration reform. The situation cannot wait simply because this is an election year, while folks in Washington choose to play politics rather than provide solutions. This is an urgent threat to our national security, and I believe the federal government must act.

A broken and ineffectual immigration system is a burden Arizonans should not have to continue to bear alone.

Sincerely,

Harry

Mitchell's statement on the introduction of H.R. 5357 can be found here in the Congressional Record.