Short Attention Span Musing - justice system edition

And, surprisingly enough, Cheeto and his many indictments aren't part of it.

...First up: the big news of the week.

From AZ Family, written by Peter Valencia, dated 11/29 -

2 Cochise County supervisors indicted for 2022 election interference

The Arizona Attorney General’s Office has announced that a grand jury has handed down an indictment against two Cochise County supervisors.

The indictment was filed Monday in Maricopa County Superior Court. According to the AG’s office, Peggy Judd and Terry “Tom” Crosby conspired to delay the canvass of votes cast in the county during the November 2022 General Election. Both now face felony offenses of conspiracy and interference with an election officer.

A press release from Attorney General Kris Mayes is here.  The indictment itself (part of the press release) is here.  From Maricopa County Superior Court records: the case number is CR2023-008495.

Arraignment is scheduled for 12/21/2023

Guessing that Kelli Ward and the other 2020 fake electors were hoping that election-denying would get lost in the hubbub.

My guess: Not so much.

Other news:

...The U.S. House expelled Rep. George Santos (R-NY) by an overwhelming margin this week.  However, Arizona's representatives in Congress weren't exactly unanimous in the desire to expel the oft-indicted member.

From the vote:

All Democratic members from AZ voted to expel Santos, but four GOP members from AZ voted to protect criminality -

Crane (AZ2), Biggs (AZ5), Gosar (AZ9), and Lesko (AZ8).

Not surprising: Biggs and Gosar are relentlessly partisan bigots and Crane is their ideological saddle partner.

Surprising:  Lesko.  I figured that if there was a fourth AZGOPer to vote to protect Santos, it would be David Schweikert.  He's got ethical issues of his own, thought he would vote to help one of his own.

I was wrong.

...Arizona Supreme Court Justice Bill Montgomery (R-Dougie) recused himself from a case involving Planned Parenthood, a group that he's demonized in the past.

From AZ Mirror, written by Gloria Rebecca Gomez, dated 11/30 -

Anti-abortion AZ Supreme Court Justice recuses self from abortion case

An Arizona Supreme Court judge who once accused Planned Parenthood of committing genocide has agreed to recuse himself from a case involving the organization that will determine the future legality of abortion in the state. 

In October, Planned Parenthood Arizona called for Justice Bill Montgomery to step away from the case after the resurfacing of a 2017 Facebook post in which he said its national counterpart was responsible for the “greatest generational genocide known to man.” The organization, which runs four of the state’s nine abortion clinics and is the main litigant in the case, argued that Montgomery’s vehement opposition to it threatens to jeopardize its right to a fair and impartial trial. 

There are many amicus briefs filed for this one.

It's scheduled to be heard by the AZ supes on 12/12.

..And in sad news,  Arizona icon Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman on the U.S. Supreme Court, has passed away at age 93

From AZ Mirror, written by Ashley Murray, dated 12/1 -

Sandra Day O’Connor, who made history as the first woman on the Supreme Court, dies at 93

The first woman to serve on the nation’s highest court is dead at 93.

Sandra Day O’Connor, a groundbreaking justice on the U.S. Supreme Court, died Friday in Phoenix, of complications related to advanced dementia, probably Alzheimer’s, and a respiratory illness, according to an announcement from the court.

President Ronald Reagan nominated O’Connor in 1981, and she was confirmed by the full Senate, 99-0, in September of that year

I didn't always agree with her, but always thought she was a decent human being.

My deepest condolences go out to her family and friends.

Lesko's out; the race is on to replace her

From Arizona Agenda -

The Daily Agenda: Congressional scramble!

Republican U.S. Rep. Debbie Lesko blindsided Arizona’s political junkies yesterday when she announced she has had enough of the swamp.

“Right now, Washington D.C. is broken; it is hard to get anything done,” she wrote, declaring she won’t run for reelection next year so she can spend more time with her mother and grandchildren.

Already, the scramble is on to replace her. There are rumors that last year’s U.S. Senate GOP nominee Blake Masters might get in the race. That Mark Lamb might drop out of the Senate race and run for the West Valley district instead. That Arizona Treasurer Kim Yee could resign and run, or that any number of Republican lawmakers, including House Speaker Ben Toma and Rep. Steve Montenegro, might be eyeing the soon-to-be-vacant seat. 

Kari Lake has already announced she’s backing failed Attorney General candidate Abe Hamadeh, who made it official and jumped into the race a few hours after getting slapped with $55,000 in court sanctions for making things up in his election lawsuit. 

Two things here:

1. I'm NOT saying that the folks at AZ Agenda are wrong (they know way more about this stuff than I do) but if Lamb enters this race, he'll have an uphill battle.  While under Section II of the US Constitution, he only has to live in the state to be a Congresscritter in any district in the state, in practical terms, it's a good idea to live in the district or at least in the county of the district.

And while the Pinal County Sheriff lives in AZ, he most assuredly doesn't live in the district or even in Maricopa County.

2. The person most relieved by Lesko's decision may be...fellow Republican Congresscritter David Schweikert.  

One (or more) of the people looking Lesko's seat may have been looking at mounting a primary challenge to ethically-deprived Schweikert (his lack of ethics doesn't bother them, but lack of Gosar-esque insanity may trouble them), but that's no longer a safe R seat.

Lesko's seat is.

Paul Penzone not seeking a 3rd term and will resign in January

Let the political games of musical chairs and idle speculation begin.

From AZFamily -

Penzone won’t seek 3rd term as Maricopa County Sheriff, will step down in January

Maricopa County Sheriff Paul Penzone says he will not seek a 3rd term and will be stepping down as Sheriff in January 2024.

“I have decided that I will not pursue a third term,” said Penzone during an emotional news conference Monday afternoon. “Not because I leave this office in any way, shape, or form disappointed; it has all been incredible. It is the greatest privilege and blessing that anyone could’ve asked for, especially in a profession like this.” Penzone said.

Penzone also announced he would be stepping down before his current term is up, "I think it’s appropriate for me to depart of the office in January and clear the way so during the last year of my term going into elections, there aren’t distractions. It gives me a chance to pursue some opportunities to serve the public in several ways and to do some things that present themselves as incredible options and opportunities."

I'm not much into musical chairs, but I can do idle speculation with the best of them.

Caveat: No actual humans were talked for this.

I have no idea who the Democratic nominee will be; the R nominee will (probably) be someone who should be in prison used to work for Joe Arpaio.

As for Penzone's next gig, if it's not elected, I could only guess - maybe he's going to be the commissioner of the World Pickleball Tour.

OK, that's probably not going to happen. :)

Some speculation is that he plans to run for an elected office, so I'll talk about that.

US Senate - could happen, but probably not, and for two reasons.  1. Ruben Gallego has been in the race for a while.  2. Kyrsten Sinema is still lurking; a Sinema candidacy is expected to give the race to the R nominee.

US House of Representatives - could happen, but that will depend on other chips falling in a way that's favorable to him.  

If he entered the race against R David Schweikert, he'd almost certainly cause at least two of the announced candidates in the crowded Democratic primary there to withdraw.  I don't think it will happen, but given his documented history of taking on entrenched office holders with ethics issues, this one isn't out of the realm of possibility.

If he entered the race to replace Gallego in Congress, he would lose in the primary there - the candidates there have been active since before the moment that Gallego announced his intent to run for Senate.

If he entered the race for the seat held by Greg Stanton, well, I suppose it *could* happen, but I expect that he wouldn't enter that race unless Stanton announces that he won't seek another term.

Arizona Corporation Commission - the only state-level seats on the 2024 ballot.  Seems too low profile for him.

City Council, School Board, Justice of the Peace, and Constable slots - Not only do I not know where he lives (eligibility for those is residency-specific), I think those are too low profile.

State Legislature - he's highly respected; why would he want to lose that?  In other words, not gonna happen...though if he were to join the lege, he could serve as a counterbalance to John Kavanagh.

What I think will happen is that he will accept a position with the Biden Administration.

If that happens, there will be a certain synchronicity to that - Penzone's predecessor was pardoned by Biden's predecessor.

Basically, one skell pardoned another.

If Biden hires Penzone, it will be a situation where one decent human being hires another.

Shutdown delayed; McCarthy on the clock

The MSM likes to say a shutdown has been "averted," but in reality, Congress just kicked the can down the road for 45 days.

From AP --

Government shutdown averted with little time to spare as Biden signs funding before midnight

The threat of a federal government shutdown suddenly lifted late Saturday as President Joe Biden signed a temporary funding bill to keep agencies open with little time to spare after Congress rushed to approve the bipartisan deal.

The package drops aid to Ukraine, a White House priority opposed by a growing number of GOP lawmakers, but increases federal disaster assistance by $16 billion, meeting Biden’s full request. The bill funds government until Nov. 17.

[snip]

The outcome ends, for now, the threat of a shutdown, but the reprieve may be short-lived. Congress will again need to fund the government in coming weeks risking a crisis as views are hardening, particularly among the right-flank lawmakers whose demands were ultimately swept aside this time in favor of a more bipartisan approach.

Thanksgiving will be on November 23 this year; this funding will expire just before that.  So we'll going through this again during the run up to that holiday.

Of course,  Kevin McCarthy may not be Speaker of the House at that point.

From BBC (UK) -

Hardline Republicans seek to oust House Speaker Kevin McCarthy

A hardline Republican says he will seek to oust House Speaker Kevin McCarthy this week, after he pushed through a last-minute spending bill with support from the opposition Democrats.

Mr McCarthy submitted the bill - aimed at averting a government shutdown - in defiance of the right of his party.

They had already vowed to topple him if he tried to overcome their opposition with Democratic support.

Hardline Republicans in both houses of Congress voted against the motion.

[snip]

On Sunday, Rep Matt Gaetz vowed to oust Mr McCarthy, telling the CNN that House Republicans needed "trustworthy" leadership.

"I do intend to file a motion to vacate against Speaker McCarthy this week," said Mr Gaetz, long a vocal critic of the Californian congressman. "I think we need to move on with new leadership that can be trustworthy."

I think that McCarthy will survive the initial threat to his speakership, if only because Gaetz is so profoundly and personally unpopular.

Plus, instead of voting for Democrat Hakeem Jeffries, the Rs will try to select a speaker from their caucus.

And though he may be a lousy human being and a worse public servant, the least bad R may be the one that they're intent on deposing.

The Senate vote on the measure is here.  The only surprise in it is that a certain Senator from Arizona didn't vote against the measure because it didn't contain enough money for hedge fund managers.

The House vote on the measure is here.  No surprises here. Arizona Republicans Biggs, Crane, Lesko, Schweikert, and, of course, Paul Gosar voted against it; all other members from AZ voted for it.

Hope David Schweikert (R-Ethics Issues) isn't claustrophobic

'Cuz the field to unseat him is a crowded one.

There's a new entrant on the Democratic side of race - 

Ireland-born Wall Street guy Conor O'Callaghan.  Long-time Democratic activist Jeanne Lunn will serve as his committee's treasurer.

As of right now, Democrats O'Callaghan, Kurt Kroemer, Marlene Galan-Woods, Andrei Cherny, Amish Shah, and Andrew Horne are running for Schweikert's seat and I expect that they won't be the only entrants in the Democratic primary.

A list of statements of interest filed with the Arizona Secretary of State is here.

Plus, I expect that Schweikert will be challenged in the primary, from his party's right wing.

While, like most R electeds, he has ethics "issues," he doesn't seem to be quite as bigoted as fellow R Paul Gosar.

Caveat1 - This is my district now, but I have *not* decided who to vote for, and I won't make that decision until I have a ballot in hand.

Caveat2 - Forming a committee or filing a statement is no guarantee that someone will be on a ballot, nor is such required before being on a ballot.

Marlene Galan-Woods, Grant Woods' widow, jumps into the race to unseat David Schweikert

The field challenging David Schweikert (R-ethics violations on the hoof) in AZCD1 just got a little deeper.

Now Marlene Galan-Woods, a former TV newscaster and the widow of Grant Woods, has filed to run in the Democratic primary.

KPNX has a story on Galan-Woods here.

Ellen McIntosh will be the treasurer of the committee.

The CD1 candidate field is getting crowded

Kurt Kroemer, an experienced exec for non-profits, has formed a committee in the D race to unseat the vulnerable R David Schweikert.

Kroemer has already started his campaign - he sent out a mass text on Wednesday.

He joins Amish Shah, a doctor and member of the Arizona Legislature, and Andrei Cherny, a former chair of the Arizona Democratic Party, in the race.  

They may be the earliest entrants, but I don't expect them to be the last ones.

Disclosure time: While I haven't made a decision as yet, because of a move, I now live in CD1 and will be voting in this primary.

State Rep. Amish Shah files for a run for Congress

Dr. Amish Shah, a Democratic State Representative from LD5 has formed a committee with the FEC for a candidacy for Congress.

He's not running for Ruben Gallego's soon-to-be vacant seat, but is challenging the unethical David Schweikert instead.  In 2022, Schweikert won re-election by a little over 3K votes over Jevin Hodge, a Democrat with lots of energy but almost no name recognition.  He's vulnerable.

The treasurer for the committee is Heather Mrowiec.

The form filed with the FEC is here.

Andy Biggs, joining David Schweikert, with his acts being considered by the House Ethics Committee

From KJZZ, written by Ron Dungan -

House Jan. 6 panel recommends ethics investigation for Rep. Biggs

The House Jan. 6 committee has urged the Justice Department to bring criminal charges against former President Donald Trump for the Capitol insurrection.

It also recommended ethics investigations for a handful of lawmakers, including Arizona’s Andy Biggs.

The committee issued subpoenas against Republican leader Kevin McCarthy and three other GOP lawmakers — all of whom refused to comply.

At least Schweikert's violations fell under the heading of "conventionally corrupt."

Not sure what heading covers aiding and abetting treason.

Jeez, if you're going to run ads, at least get the spelling of your candidate's name right

Found on the website of AZFamily (though it's probably in other places) -

Not only is the candidate's name misspelled, Cheeto's name is bigger.

In case you missed it: AZ GOPer fined $125,000 for misusing campaign funds

From The Daily Beast -

GOP Congressman Fined $125,000 For Financial Violations

The other shoe has dropped for Rep. David Schweikert (R-AZ).

His campaign committee has agreed to pay a $125,000 federal fine for misusing donor money and associated reporting violations, according to new Federal Election Commission disclosures.

The investigation, which found “reason to believe” that the violations were “knowing and willful,” was the FEC twin of a separate congressional ethics probe that fined the Arizona Republican $50,000 in 2020 for nearly a dozen violations. The inquiries centered around Schweikert’s dealings with his former chief of staff, political consultant Oliver Schwab, specifically payments to Schwab’s personal credit card and firm.

The agreement was signed on Jan. 12, and the FEC released the documents almost a month later on Friday. As part of the agreement, the Schweikert campaign admitted to breaking three federal laws—all related to expenses.

Sounds like a Friday newsdump to me.

Schwab, mentioned in the third paragraph, has a long history of ethical issues.  He also has a history of supporting some R extremists in their primaries -

I have little doubt that Schweikert will face a primary challenge from the right.

So far as I can see from the allegations against him and this fine, he's only conventionally corrupt and not treasonous enough for today's GQP.

Of course, the result of the R primary in his district will be irrelevant; in the general election, support Jevin Hodge for Congress.

Arizona"s R members of Congress don't really give a damn about Arizona

At least based on their bill proposals, they don't.  They *do* hate immigrants, government/society, choice, Covid mitigation measures, democracy/election, and, of course, Joe Biden.

From my spreadsheet, data source Congress.gov -

While the total number of bills proposed by each member was easy to determine (than you. Congress.gov); categorization less so, since that was all me.

They proposed only six Arizona-specific bills between them (with Paul Gosar leading the way, but he made up for it) they all hate immigrants with 13 bill proposals between them.

However, that number is next to nothing when compared to their anti-government/society proposals, with 44 of those.

Additionally, they each like Covid, or at least have offered proposals against Covid mitigation measures.

Lastly, it's no surprise that Gosar and Biggs, two of Congress' leading collaborators of the January 6th insurrection have offered bills that are anti-elections/democracy.

Even the fifth, unofficial, Republican member of the Arizona delegation to Congress, Kyrsten Sinema, did better than that -

Republicans: "Damn the facts! Full speed ahead!"

Probably not surprising given how enthusiastically, and violently, that most Republicans have embraced Cheeto's Big Lie about the 2020 election.

The latest thing that has been debunked but that Rs have embraced is the idea the the Biden administration intends to pay immigrant families that were "separated" by the previous presidential administration.

In a word, the idea is garbage.  Rs know that, but they have their talking point and are running with it.

The latest example of this is H. R. 5854, a bill introduced in Congress by a Trumpkin member of Congress and cosponsored by most of the R caucus (including ALL R members of the Arizona delegation to Congress).

Of course, AZ's Debbie Lesko wanted to independently assert her own fealty to Cheeto and lies, and did so by introducing H. Res. 768, condemning the Biden administration for paying immigrants, and other things.

Federal committees update

 From the website of the FEC - 

Norton is a political newbie who is mounting a primary challenge to David Schweikert.  As Norton is a direct marketing guy, I expect his campaign to come down to "Same stuff, different name."

Lindberg's desire to run is not new; the federal committee is.

Lowell looks to be a doctor who has signed up for a seat on the clown car of Rs running for AZ02 (sometimes, it seems that the Rs who aren't running for that seat are running for governor.  Not completely true, I know, but there are a LOT of both.)

David Schweikert: Say whatever else you want about the man, he can sure follow instructions

While I no longer live in his district (thank you Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission), apparently I'm still on the email list compiled by Congressman David Schweikert (R-AZCD6).  I expect that to change shortly after this post is seen by the Congressman his senior staff a junior member of his staff OK, some lowly intern reading this stuff for college credit and chance to make contacts for a future political career.

On Friday, news broke that the Heritage Foundation, an influential Republican "think tank", sent a letter to Republican members of Congress advising them not to bother with trying to "govern" (no proposing or passing responsible legislation) and instead focus their efforts on "getting" President Obama by focusing on scandals, real (IRS scandal and AP phone records, maybe), spun from almost nothing (Benghazi), and completely made up (umbrella-gate).

Note to the Heritage Foundation:  Not to belabor the obvious, but "getting" the President has been the Republican plan since he was inaugurated in 2009.  Advising the Rs in Congress to do what they have been doing all along probably isn't going to enhance your credibility.

Anyway, on to the story...

From theGrio, written by Joy-Ann Reid -

In a letter to members of Congress, which was obtained by NBC News, Heritage Action for America, the lobbying arm of the Heritage Foundation (which recently found itself in hot water over the racial IQ theories of the co-author of their widely panned immigration reform study, Jason Richwine, who resigned from the think tank last Friday), urged Republicans on Capitol Hill not to govern, and instead, to focus on the would-be “scandals” plaguing the Obama administration.

The letter, which is addressed to House Speaker John Boehner and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, trumpets the negative media buzz surrounding the White House, saying that, “for the first time, the activities of the Obama administration are receiving a sustained public vetting.  Americans’ outrage over Benghazi is amplified by the Internal Revenue Service’s intimidation of conservative grassroots organizations and a cascade of negative headlines.  There is the real sense the Obama administration has been less than forthright with the American people, the press and lawmakers.”

In light of the white hot media spotlight on the administration, and to deflect attention from the many policy areas where Republicans don’t quite get along, the letter urges: “it is incumbent upon the House of Representatives to conduct oversight hearings on those actions, but it would be imprudent to do anything that shifts the focus from the Obama administration to the ideological differences within the House Republican Conference.”

 This diary from DailyKos has the text of the full letter.


It didn't take long for "Foreclosure Dave" Schweikert to "snap-to" upon receiving the letter.

His latest "newsletter", from my email inbox today, from the email address david.schweikert@congressnewsletter.net -

 Schweikert hit all of the high points in the current litany of Republican talking points, even throwing in a demonization of health care reform for good measure.

When dogs perform tricks at their masters' commands, they generally receive treats of some kind; I don't know what members of Congress get when the perform on cue, but I'm guessing there are dollar signs attached.

Oh, and before the Congressman's staff removes me from their email list, I hope they take a refresher course on the use of the possessive in the English language - 

Normally, I'm not a grammar Nazi (as a blogger, I've published too many typos to be a hypocritical hardass about it), but this was (presumably) written by the staff of a sitting member of Congress.  They're supposed to be better than this.

The way that they wrote the last sentence signifies the existence of multiple "White Houses" in the US.  While there are many "white houses" (houses painted white), there's only one "White House" (the seat of the President of the United States, located at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C.)

 Tighten it up, folks.

The 2012 primaries: one major disappointment, a minor one, but otherwise, no real surprises

Tuesday's primaries are over, and the post-game analysis is in full swing.  As I wasn't able to live blog the results last night due to being otherwise occupied (at David Schapira's election night gathering in Tempe.  Hard to type when it is too dark to see the keyboard... :) ).

There were a couple of disappointments, but the only surprises Tuesday were in margins of victory (or loss, depending on your perspective), not in end results.

First, the disappointments -

- The biggest disappointment of the evening was, of course, David Schapira's second place finish, behind Kyrsten Sinema, in the Democratic primary in CD9.  He ran a positive and energetic campaign, earned the respect of many people who had never heard of him before this campaign (and reinforced the respect of the many people who *had* heard of him), and has a bright future despite this one loss, the first in his electoral career.

- A minor disappointment, but not a surprise, was the ability of LD23 R state reps John Kavanagh and Michelle Ugenti to fend off the challenge of Jennifer Petersen, a member of the Scottsdale school district governing board.  Petersen has a reputation as a pragmatic public servant, ergo, she had almost no chance of getting through a Republican primary.  Her north Scottsdale district used to send a highly-respected moderate R to the lege in the person of Carolyn Allen.  Now, the most "moderate" is State Sen. Michelle Reagan, and she has gone hard to the right, probably in preparation for an expected Congressional or statewide run.  The winner of the CD9 race in November, regardless of partisan affiliation, should probably start oppo research on her, at just about the time that the polls close.


Now, the (mostly pleasant) surprises -

- In the LD25 Senate R primary, disgraced former state senator Russell Pearce lost big to Mesa businessman Bob Worsley in his bid to return to the senate.  He has now lost a recall election by double digit percentage points, where he argued that if only Republicans could've voted in it (like, say, as in a primary), he would have won.  Well, he got the primary that he wanted, and...he lost by double digit percentage points.

- The other Pearce, Lester, lost his primary race for the 2nd District seat on the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors to businessman Steve Chucri.  It was by an equally resounding margin (double digits, baby!).

- Pearce ally John Fillmore lost his bid for the LD16 state senate R nomination to Pearce foe Rich Crandall.

- In the one victory for the Pearce machine, Sylvia Allen, currently in the state senate, won her primary race for the Republican nomination for the 3rd District seat on the Navajo County Board of Supervisors.  She won with 80% of the vote, but her opponent ran as a $500 Exemption candidate, while she had the thousands of dollars that she transferred from the legislative campaign committee.

- In the R primary for US Senate, it wasn't surprising to see Jeff Flake defeat Wil Cardon, nor even to do so soundly.  However, Flake didn't just win soundly - he absolutely thumped Cardon, gaining more than three times as many votes as Cardon. 

Damn!

- In Pinal County, embattled Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu held off multiple challengers for the R nomination, which in itself isn't much of a surprise - he was expected to win a plurality of the votes because the other candidates would split the anti-Babeu vote.  What is surprising is that Babeu got 61% of the vote.  The other three candidates combined didn't equal his total.

- In the LD24 D primaries, Katie Hobbs (Senate) and Lela Alston and Chad Campbell (House) easily turned aside the challenges from Ken Cheuvront (Senate) and his mom Jean and Tom Nerini (House), respectively.  While Hobbs was clearly the better candidate in her race, Cheuvront had money and name recognition on his side, so Hobbs' margin of victory was a bit of a surprise (>20 percentage points).

- In the CD6 R primary, freshman Congressman David Schweikert defeated fellow freshman Ben Quayle.  As a Democrat, I viewed that race much like I viewed the 2000 World Series between the Yankees and the Mets as a Red Sox fan - I hoped both would lose.  It didn't work out that way, but at least one lost. :)

- In the City of Scottsdale's mayoral race, incumbent Jim Lane received the most votes, which was no surprise.  What was surprising was his margin of victory - he gained a majority of votes cast, easily avoiding a November runoff against one of his challengers - businessman/community activist John Washington or businessman Drew Bernhardt.


Democratic primary results from Maricopa County are here (state and federal) and here (county)..
Republican primary results from Maricopa County are here (state and federal) and here (county).
Other party and non-partisan results from Maricopa County are here.
Results from the AZ Secretary of State are here.

AZ Republicans taking the "3 Bs"* approach to redistricting

* = "Bluster, Bully, and Bullshit"

Arizona's Republicans, led by their officeholders, are crying "foul" over the independent redistricting process.

They've whined about all sorts of alleged misdeeds and wrongdoing on the part of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC), but mostly they're upset over the fact that, unlike the last incarnation of the AIRC, this Commission is actually living up to the "Independent" part of their name.

They started their attacks with "bluster", ranging from busing scads of "grass roots" Republicans to AIRC hearings and meetings all over the state, many of whom read, with voices filled with self-righteous indignation, from a script of fabricated talking points (seriously, many of them walked up to the microphone script in hand and read the same text over and over) to press releases denouncing the AIRC as partisan and not in keeping with the wishes of Arizona's voters.

They then added "bully" to their repertoire, first with threats from people like Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne, a scam artist of long renown, ginning up an "investigation" of the Commission to the current kangaroo court conducted by the members of the Republican majority in the legislature where people like Republican state senator Andy Biggs has bullied and ridiculed members of the public who don't drink the Kool-Aid and follow the script of "independent redistricting really bad, Republican officeholders really good" (check out the video archive here; as of this writing, there are archives of four of the meetings of the Joint Legislative Committee on Redistricting.  Each of them contains many examples of this behavior.  Also, Steve at Arizona Eagletarian has reporting here and here).

Note:  While I was writing this post, word came down that Horne has been disqualified from investigating the AIRC.

Also, Jan Brewer, Arizona's Republican governor is threatening to call a special session of the Arizona Senate in order to remove the commissioners for what she calls "gross misconduct" and I call "living up to the 'Independent' in 'Independent Redistricting Commission'."

As for the "bullshit" part of the "3 Bs", well, that's been an integral part of the game plan all along.

Whether it was the assertion that renowned Constitutional scholar Paul Bender was unqualified to even be nominated to the AIRC and suing to have him removed from the list of nominees, the claims that Colleen Mathis, selected as the independent chair of the Independent Redistricting Commission was actually a Democrat, the assertions that the AIRC has been too secretive in its operations and deliberations crafting the draft maps that have the Republicans so upset, or more, the Rs have been flinging bullshit against the AIRC's wall for months hoping that some of it sticks.

So far, their efforts have only left the Rs with stinky hands, but that hasn't made them less determined to undermine the AIRC and the will of the voters, who created the AIRC specifically to remove elected officials from the redistricting process.

A few facts:

The AIRC has held dozens of public meetings and hearings and accepted *hundreds* of hours of public input on the maps and the factors that should be considered when laying out the new legislative and Congressional districts.

Colleen Mathis *is* an Independent.  The issue of her husband's support for a Democratic candidate in one election ignores the fact that her husband has also supported Republican candidates, attending a Bush inauguration ball with her.

Professor Paul Bender, a true Independent (more liberal than the Rs or Ds) is so qualified that the members of  Commission on Appellate Court Appointments, most of whom are accomplished in their fields, enthusiastically supported his nomination when screening the applicants for the AIRC (except for Doug Cole, Chuck Coughlin's plant on the commission,  Cole was like Mikey of Life Cereal fame - he hates everything...that doesn't result in increased power and profits for him, Coughlin, and their clients at HighGround).

Another thing area that has sparked Republican complaints is that the draft maps have resulted in incumbents such as Congressmen David Schweikert and Ben Quayle facing off in a primary.

What they don't mention in their complaints is that both Schweikert and Quayle have freely chosen to run in a district that they don't live in (Schweikert lives in draft CD4, Quayle in draft CD9, but both would rather run in north Scottsdale, which is in draft CD6).  Something that is allowed under the US Constitution, but it is rather cynical for them to make that choice and then complain about the unfairness of the AIRC.

Note:  The draft CD9 is competitive, leaning slightly R, while both the draft CD4 and draft CD6 are overwhelmingly R.  Draft CD4 has a strong rural component though, and Schweikert is most definitely not an "honorary judge of cow milking contests at 4-H fairs" kind of guy.

As for the whining that the AIRC has sacrificed "communities of interest" to bolster "competitiveness" -

The AIRC's competitiveness analysis of the draft maps are here (legislative) and here (Congressional).

Based on the voter registration numbers, only one of the 30 legislative districts is truly competitive and maybe four others have a realistic chance of breaking that way.  Otherwise, 18 LDs will be solidly R and seven will be solidly D.  Even if all five of the competitive and quasi-competitive districts go Democratic (possible, but not likely), that would result in 18-12 and 36-24 splits (favoring the Rs) in the AZ Senate and House respectively.  Not exactly leading to a positive change in AZ there.

Also based on the registration numbers, the Congressional districts wouldn't be much better.  Two of the nine Congressional districts would be competitive, while four would be solidly R and three would be solidly D (one of the D districts would be poachable by the Rs, but it would be an uphill battle).

Based on the numbers, about the only real "community of interest" whose interests have been sacrificed  is the community called "Arizona", which stands to gain the most from having districts competitive enough to force candidates and officeholders to actually represent their constituents, not just their friends at country club cocktail parties and tea party "Kool-Aid" drinking sessions.

Of course, the draft maps *do*protect the "community of interest" that least needs protection -

Republican officeholders.

And that fact won't change no matter how much they whine about things in an attempt to intimidate the AIRC into making the maps even less competitive than they are already.

The second round of hearings is winding down, but there is still time to add your voice in support of an increased number of truly competitive districts.

The AIRC will travel to places like Yuma, Phoenix, Scottsdale, Marana, Casa Grande and Cottonwood in the next week.  Make plans to be at one or more (if possible) hearings.  If that isn't feasible, the AIRC accepts public input via phone, email, or through their website.

...In a related matter, some pics from the AIRC hearing held in Mesa on Wednesday evening (note - the overall turnout was light, but out of two dozen speakers, only one or two came out against competitive districts):

Commissioner Scott Freeman, the commissioner in attendance Wednesday

Korinne Kubena Belock of Strategic Telemetry giving a overview of the redistricting process

Tempe Democratic activist  Lauren Kuby speaking in support of competitive districts

State Rep. Lynne Pancrazi, advocating for keeping Yuma and La Paz counties together, and out of a Maricopa County-dominated LD

Jay Schlum, mayor of Fountain Hills, testifying in favor of changing the maps to put FH together with other northeast valley communities like Rio Verde.  Other local elected officials there, from places like Queen Creek, Apache Junction, Gilbert, Chandler, and more similarly spoke on behalf of issue relevent to their particular communities.

The COINS Act and David Schweikert: Funnelling taxpayer money to mining industry interests under the guise of reducing federal spending

To great fanfare (and ridicule) earlier this week, Rep. David Schweikert introduced H.R. 2977, the COINS Act.  If enacted into law, it would end the printing of $1 bills, instead replacing them with $1 coins.

He claims that the measure will save the taxpayers billions of dollars over the next 30 years.

What he doesn't mention is that his measure will give billions of taxpayer dollars to mining industry interests over the same period.

The composition of dollar coins, courtesy the US Mint's website (Cu = Copper, Zn =Zinc, Mn = Manganese, and Ni = Nickel) -

88.5% Cu


6% Zn

3.5% Mn

2% Ni

Weight of each coin: 8.1 grams, meaning that each coin contains 7.1685g of Cu.


Current production level of dollar coins - 258 million
 
Projected production of dollar coins over 30 years, at current annual production level (258 million times 30 years) - 7.74 billion
 
The 30 year projected dollar coin production needed to replace paper bills, according to a study from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) - 41 billion
 
Difference:  33.26 billion (4.3X as much as would be needed under the current system of paper bills and metal coins)
 
Additional pounds of copper (Cu) needed over the next 30 years, based on Schweikert's plan and GAO estimates (assuming no wastage or change in the composition of dollar coins): 525,635,627
 
Current price per pound of copper, courtesy CNN - $3.28
 
Net increased revenue for the copper industry over 30 years (basic math):  $1.724 billion
 
Likelihood that the increased demand for copper will result in higher prices for copper over the next 30 years, meaning the above figure is a conservative one (my estimate):  nearly 100%
 
Oh, and by the way, there are provisions in Schweikert's bill that would require the Federal Reserve to take the dollar coins issued since 1979 (Susan B. Anthony, Native American, and Presidential) out of circulation, likely increasing the production needed to meet the currency needs and making the above numbers conservative estimates.
 
Interesting campaign contributions to Schweikert this year (and I haven't yet thoroughly examined individual contributions as yet), courtesy the FEC:

FREEPORT-MCMORAN COPPER & GOLD INC. CITIZENSHIP COMMITTEE 1/28/2011 $5000


KOCH INDUSTRIES INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (KOCHPAC) 6/10/2011 $1000

KOCH INDUSTRIES INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (KOCHPAC) 6/10/2011 $2000

FYI - Freeport-McMoran is one of the largest copper mining companies in the world, and Koch Industries is a huge conglomerate with its fingers in many areas, including mining and minerals.

Schweikert's bill has been assigned to the House Financial Services Committee (note: Schweikert is a member of that committee).

Number of Republicans on the committee: 34

Number of Republicans on the committee who have received campaign contributions from either (or both, as in the case of Schweikert) of the above PACs: 25

Generally, Financial Services Committee members receive bribes "campaign contributions" from insurance, banking, investment, and real estate industry PACs.  It's more than a little unusual for them to receive mining PAC money directly (their normal benefactors may benefit from investments in mineral resources, but investments are their business, not mining). 

However, when a bill like this comes along, apparently, so does the money.


Green PS -

While the exact composition of the paper used for federal reserve notes (dollar bills) is confidential, it is still basically *paper* and paper is made from trees, a renewable resource.  If done properly, trees and other plants can be harvested, replanted, and reharvested several times during a typical human lifespan.

They only way that metals could be considered "renewable" is if human lifespans were measured not in years, decades, or even centuries, but instead in *epochs.*  It takes millions of years for geological forces to create more ore once ore is removed from the ground.

Schweikert's bill is short-sighted - it generates relatively immediate profits for his campaign contributors, but at the cost to Americans of the permanent use of limited natural resources.

Notes and caveats:

The above estimates and calculations are based on current prices, which are subject to change (I expect them to change, but have no idea how much, so there is no way for me to include those changes in calculations), on an assumption that the composition of dollar coins remains unchanged for the next 30 years (again, I expect changes, but cannot even begin to guess what they will be, or when they will occur), and that there is no waste in the coin-making process that would necessitate the purchase of a greater quantity of metal than would theoretically be needed to manufacture the coins in a perfect production process (all manufacturing processes have waste, but again, I have no knowledge of the wastage rate in the Mint's processes, so that number cannot be included in calculations here).

Also, there would be a benefit to the mining companies of Zinc (Zn), Nickel (Ni), and Manganese (Mn) (the other elements in a dollar coin), but because those metals currently make up such a small percentage of the composition of dollar coins, I didn't include them in the calculations.

Later...