With Senate candidate speculation running wild across Arizona (Flake in, Shadegg out, Arpaio flirting, Democrats waiting until summer to see what happens with Gabrielle Giffords' recovery), now folks are starting with speculation regarding possible Congressional runs.
Some of the names so far, mostly in a run for Jeff Flake's seat (CD6) sort of way, but not really, since redistricting could make the current CD6 a totally different district (with a couple of other committees thrown in for good measure) -
Republican Kirk Adams, speaker of the Arizona House, from East Mesa
Republican Russell Pearce, president of the Arizona Senate, from Central/West Mesa
Republican Scott Smith, Mayor of Mesa
Republican Chuck Gray, former state senator from LD19 (East Mesa), close to Pearce so probably won't jump into the race if Pearce actually runs
Republican Jay Tibshraeny, current Mayor of Chandler, former state senator, and previously considered an heir-apparent for Flake's seat if Flake moved on/out. Redistricting could affect his decision to run/not run (that caveat could apply to almost every possible candidate, so consider it applied for each one)
Republican Rich Crandall, current state senator from East Mesa. Crandall, Adams, and Gray are all from the same district, LD19, but they aren't close friends by any stretch and could easily end up knocking each other off, helping Smith (if he jumps in)
Republican Gabriela Saucedo Mercer has opened a committee to run against Democratic incumbent Raul Grijalva in CD7. Haven't heard of her before this and don't know much about her. However, if she's a serious candidate (and not just a fringe tea party type), we'll know more later in the year
Republican David Schweikert has opened a reelection committee for his seat
Democrat Harry Mitchell hasn't ruled out a run for a rematch with Schweikert, looking to reclaim the seat he formerly held
Democrat Ann Kirkpatrick, like Mitchell a former member of Congress, may also run again
Republican Hugh Hallman, Mayor of Tempe, has ambitions for higher office, but any run for Congress will depend on redistricting and which other candidates jump in
Democrat Neil Giuliano, former Mayor of Tempe and former Republican, could also jump in, especially if Mitchell decides against a run. I don't know how close he and Giuliano are, but Mitchell is the political force of nature in Tempe, so his decision will affect that of the other potential candidates
Democrat Phil Gordon, current Mayor of Phoenix whose term expires this year. Noted for his ambition and his Phoenix-based campaign machine, if he doesn't go for the Senate seat, is seen as likely to pursue a Congressional run. Of course, he could go for Governor in 2014, or for McCain's Senate seat in 2016, or...? :)
Republican State Senator Rick Murphy, a former (and future?) Congressional candidate, has opened a $500 Threshold Committee for a run at the Peoria Unified School District Governing Board. Someone like Murphy standing for a public school committee slot is like someone like me standing for chair of the AZGOP. Except that I don't want to kill off and bury the AZGOP, just help defeat them at the ballot box
There will be other names out there once the new district maps are drawn, and once the field for the soon-to-be open U.S. Senate seat sorts itself out.
Later...
Showing posts with label Shadegg. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Shadegg. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Breaking: Politico.com reporting Jon Kyl not running for reelection
Thanks for the heads-up on this goes out to the blog Arizona's Politics...
From Politico, written by David Catanese -
Look for Republicans Jeff Flake and John Shadegg, current and former members of Congress, respectively, to be two of the most prominent names in any discussion of potential candidates to replace Kyl.
They won't be the *only* ones, however.
More later...
From Politico, written by David Catanese -
Kyl to retire, won't seek another termAssuming this report is accurate, and rumors to this effect have been swirling for weeks, even months, this development, along with redistricting and the addition of a ninth Congressional seat to Arizona, would turn next year's elections here into complete free-for-all.
Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl will announce he won't seek another term at a press conference in his home state Thursday morning, POLITICO has learned.
The third-term Kyl was first elected to the Senate in 1994.
A GOP operative notes that the last time Arizona elected a Democrat to the U.S. Senate was 1988 -- 22 years ago.
Look for Republicans Jeff Flake and John Shadegg, current and former members of Congress, respectively, to be two of the most prominent names in any discussion of potential candidates to replace Kyl.
They won't be the *only* ones, however.
More later...
Wednesday, January 05, 2011
Shadegg starting a new/old career: corporate lobbyist
Former Congresscritters are barred from lobbying their former colleagues for one year after leaving office.
However, the law that bars that activity is very specific and only disallows direct contact with current members of the U.S. Congress for a lobbying-related purpose.
There are, however, a number of ways around that, some of them even being legal - lobbying indirectly (i.e. - behind the scenes organizing), "advising" other lobbyists, lobbying at the state level, etc.
It seems that former Rep. John Shadegg (R-CD3) has chosen the last course.
From KSWT in Yuma -
My expectation (and it's only that, an expectation. I'm not exactly a confidante of any of the people I'm about to name):
Shadegg will be with GI for a couple of years before making the "official" move to the lobbyist ranks. The one thing that looms on the horizon that could possibly change the plan is if Jon Kyl doesn't run for reelection to the U.S. Senate next year (whether to retire, run for VP, or something else). In that event, Shadegg will be one of the many R names looking into sliding into that spot.
For the record - right now, I'd bet on Kyl running for reelection. However, I reserve the right to change that at any time when more info becomes available. :)
However, the law that bars that activity is very specific and only disallows direct contact with current members of the U.S. Congress for a lobbying-related purpose.
There are, however, a number of ways around that, some of them even being legal - lobbying indirectly (i.e. - behind the scenes organizing), "advising" other lobbyists, lobbying at the state level, etc.
It seems that former Rep. John Shadegg (R-CD3) has chosen the last course.
From KSWT in Yuma -
The Goldwater Institute has named retiring U.S. Rep. John Shadegg of Arizona as a senior fellow.
The libertarian-leaning group says Shadegg will help fulfill its mission of economic freedom and limited government by sharing his experience and expertise with other scholars.The Goldwater Institute isn't much more than a generic corporate lobbying group working under the guise of a "think tank". One of their big targets recently has been health care reform, something that has been at the top of Shadegg's personal hit list, so they should be a good fit.
Shadegg is a plaintiff in the Phoenix-based group's challenge to health care overhaul passed in Washington last year.
My expectation (and it's only that, an expectation. I'm not exactly a confidante of any of the people I'm about to name):
Shadegg will be with GI for a couple of years before making the "official" move to the lobbyist ranks. The one thing that looms on the horizon that could possibly change the plan is if Jon Kyl doesn't run for reelection to the U.S. Senate next year (whether to retire, run for VP, or something else). In that event, Shadegg will be one of the many R names looking into sliding into that spot.
For the record - right now, I'd bet on Kyl running for reelection. However, I reserve the right to change that at any time when more info becomes available. :)
Friday, December 17, 2010
Flake, Franks, and Shadegg: Protectors of child marriage, not protectors of children
Lost in the hubbub surrounding the culmination of the 2nd Session of the 111th Congress (DREAM Act, DADT, tax cut "compromise", omnibus spending bill, etc.) is the realization that a certain group in D.C. (hereafter referred to by the Randomly chosen mathematical variable "Rs" :) ) is still doing everything that they can to block even the least controversial legislation.
On Thursday, the party of "No" donned its costume for the D.C. Christmas pageant, going with the "Ebenezer" look. (Call it a "truth in advertising moment").
They spent most of the week voting against nearly *everything.*
In itself, that isn't noteworthy anymore - they've spent the last two years voting against every piece of significant legislation. The measures that they haven't killed outright, they've blocked as much as possible (except for the infamous tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans).
However, as the calendar has turned toward the Christmas holiday, and toward the end of the 111th Congress, their partisan obstructionism has turned into petty meanness.
This trend was highlighted Thursday, when the House Republicans killed S. 987, the International Protecting Girls by Preventing Child Marriage Act of 2010.
This bill would have made the ending of child marriage in developing countries a goal of U.S. foreign policy.
The bill should have passed easily, and would have, if House leadership had been able to bring it to the floor under normal procedures. However, due to the backlog caused by Republican obstruction of everything and the impending end of the 111th Congress, S. 987 was brought up for consideration under "suspension of the rules," meaning that a 2/3 majority vote was required for passage.
The bill was sponsored in the Senate by Dick Durbin and had a bipartisan list of 42 cosponsors, and was approved by the Senate unanimously. The related House versions of the bill, H.R. 2103 and H.R. 6521 boast more than 120 cosponsors drawn from both sides of the aisle.
With that kind of broad bipartisan support, it should have passed easily (not even Rs have the chutzpah/arrogance to publicly support the practice of forcing young girls to marry men who are two, three, or more times their own age).
Then certain "pro-life" groups started whispering that this bill would cause an increase in abortions, even though abortion, "family planning" or even "reproductive rights" are never even mentioned in it.
The final House vote on the bill was 241 in favor, 166 against. A clear majority, but not the requisite 2/3 needed for passage.
157 Republicans, including Arizona's Three Amigos, Jeff Flake, Trent Franks, and John Shadegg, expressed their support of child marriage by voting against the bill, but only one of the 157, Dan Burton of Indiana was honest enough to stand and speak to his vote. And even he only professed financial reservations about the bill (estimated: $87 million over 10 years, *if* money was appropriated in a later bill).
In an interesting non-development, none of the Three Amigos seems to have put out a press release touting their victorious defense of the institution of child marriage.
Why is that?
On Thursday, the party of "No" donned its costume for the D.C. Christmas pageant, going with the "Ebenezer" look. (Call it a "truth in advertising moment").
They spent most of the week voting against nearly *everything.*
In itself, that isn't noteworthy anymore - they've spent the last two years voting against every piece of significant legislation. The measures that they haven't killed outright, they've blocked as much as possible (except for the infamous tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans).
However, as the calendar has turned toward the Christmas holiday, and toward the end of the 111th Congress, their partisan obstructionism has turned into petty meanness.
This trend was highlighted Thursday, when the House Republicans killed S. 987, the International Protecting Girls by Preventing Child Marriage Act of 2010.
This bill would have made the ending of child marriage in developing countries a goal of U.S. foreign policy.
The bill should have passed easily, and would have, if House leadership had been able to bring it to the floor under normal procedures. However, due to the backlog caused by Republican obstruction of everything and the impending end of the 111th Congress, S. 987 was brought up for consideration under "suspension of the rules," meaning that a 2/3 majority vote was required for passage.
The bill was sponsored in the Senate by Dick Durbin and had a bipartisan list of 42 cosponsors, and was approved by the Senate unanimously. The related House versions of the bill, H.R. 2103 and H.R. 6521 boast more than 120 cosponsors drawn from both sides of the aisle.
With that kind of broad bipartisan support, it should have passed easily (not even Rs have the chutzpah/arrogance to publicly support the practice of forcing young girls to marry men who are two, three, or more times their own age).
Then certain "pro-life" groups started whispering that this bill would cause an increase in abortions, even though abortion, "family planning" or even "reproductive rights" are never even mentioned in it.
The final House vote on the bill was 241 in favor, 166 against. A clear majority, but not the requisite 2/3 needed for passage.
157 Republicans, including Arizona's Three Amigos, Jeff Flake, Trent Franks, and John Shadegg, expressed their support of child marriage by voting against the bill, but only one of the 157, Dan Burton of Indiana was honest enough to stand and speak to his vote. And even he only professed financial reservations about the bill (estimated: $87 million over 10 years, *if* money was appropriated in a later bill).
In an interesting non-development, none of the Three Amigos seems to have put out a press release touting their victorious defense of the institution of child marriage.
Why is that?
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Another Veterans' Group Grades Harry Mitchell - A+, of course
The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA) Action Fund has given out its grades to Congress in its 2010 Congressional Report Card.
The grades for the AZ delegation can be found here.
Summary:
Harry Mitchell - A+ (whooo hoooo!)
Ann Kirkpatrick - A+
Ed Pastor - A
Gabrielle Giffords - B
Raul Grijalva - C
Jon Kyl - D
John McCain - D
Trent Franks - D
Jeff Flake - F
John Shaddegg - F
The interesting part? The lowest-graded Democrat in Arizona, Raul Grijalva, still out-paced the highest-graded Republicans from our state, Franks, McCain, and Kyl.
Apparently "anti-war" isn't synonymous with "anti-warrior" and "pro-war" isn't synonymous with "pro-warrior."
No matter how much the Rs protest to the contrary.
The grades for the AZ delegation can be found here.
Summary:
Harry Mitchell - A+ (whooo hoooo!)
Ann Kirkpatrick - A+
Ed Pastor - A
Gabrielle Giffords - B
Raul Grijalva - C
Jon Kyl - D
John McCain - D
Trent Franks - D
Jeff Flake - F
John Shaddegg - F
The interesting part? The lowest-graded Democrat in Arizona, Raul Grijalva, still out-paced the highest-graded Republicans from our state, Franks, McCain, and Kyl.
Apparently "anti-war" isn't synonymous with "anti-warrior" and "pro-war" isn't synonymous with "pro-warrior."
No matter how much the Rs protest to the contrary.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
The Three Amigos vote against American workers...yet again
They may be poor representatives of the people of their districts, their state, and their country, but dammit, *nobody* can claim that they are inconsistent about it. They almost always vote against the best interests of their constituents.
On Wednesday, Arizona's Three Amigos, better known as Congressmen Trent Franks, Jeff Flake, and John Shadegg (Rs - Whichever Corporation Is Ponying Up The Campaign Cash That Week) voted as a bloc against H.R.2039, the Congressional Made in America Promise Act of 2009.
The bill simply amends the original Buy American Act by extending its provisions "to articles, materials, and supplies acquired for the use of any legislative branch office, including the House of Representatives and the Senate..."
The Buy American Act requires that when purchasing materials for its use, the government give preference to American-made items.
Extending the provisions of that act to cover materials purchased by and for the chambers of Congress may not have a huge direct economic benefit for American workers (Congress may spend a lot of money on its operations, but it's less than a drop in the bucket of the entire economy), but the move is significant as a symbol of Congress' efforts to address the plight of American workers.
Hence the united opposition of Franks, Flake, and Shadegg.
Shadegg isn't running for reelection (but look for his name to pop up in two years if Jon Kyl doesn't run for another term in the Senate), but the other two are, and are facing strong Democratic opponents.
John Thrasher, the career teacher challenging Franks in CD2, has already sent out a press release highlighting the anti-American worker vote.
Rebecca Schneider, challenging Flake in CD6, has a page on her website highlighting Flake's unwavering "no" votes against anything that would help his district, state, or country.
They can use your help in defeating these stalwarts of the Party of NO - please contribute to John Thrasher's campaign here and to Rebecca Schneider's campaign here.
Later!
On Wednesday, Arizona's Three Amigos, better known as Congressmen Trent Franks, Jeff Flake, and John Shadegg (Rs - Whichever Corporation Is Ponying Up The Campaign Cash That Week) voted as a bloc against H.R.2039, the Congressional Made in America Promise Act of 2009.
The bill simply amends the original Buy American Act by extending its provisions "to articles, materials, and supplies acquired for the use of any legislative branch office, including the House of Representatives and the Senate..."
The Buy American Act requires that when purchasing materials for its use, the government give preference to American-made items.
Extending the provisions of that act to cover materials purchased by and for the chambers of Congress may not have a huge direct economic benefit for American workers (Congress may spend a lot of money on its operations, but it's less than a drop in the bucket of the entire economy), but the move is significant as a symbol of Congress' efforts to address the plight of American workers.
Hence the united opposition of Franks, Flake, and Shadegg.
Shadegg isn't running for reelection (but look for his name to pop up in two years if Jon Kyl doesn't run for another term in the Senate), but the other two are, and are facing strong Democratic opponents.
John Thrasher, the career teacher challenging Franks in CD2, has already sent out a press release highlighting the anti-American worker vote.
Rebecca Schneider, challenging Flake in CD6, has a page on her website highlighting Flake's unwavering "no" votes against anything that would help his district, state, or country.
They can use your help in defeating these stalwarts of the Party of NO - please contribute to John Thrasher's campaign here and to Rebecca Schneider's campaign here.
Later!
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Other possible candidates in CD3 emerging
Warning: this post is mostly borne out of the fact that I am feeling under the weather and don't have the energy for anything more in-depth...
In addition to the previously mentioned names of folks entering the Rep primary to replace John Shadegg in Congress (Sens. Gorman and Waring, Rep. Crump, Mayor Parker, and Blogger Noble), other, more obscure names have been floated as having an interest. I make no guarantees about the accuracy of these sources (including the one where I'm the source).
Some of the names that are out there -
...Benjamin Quayle, the lawyer son of former U.S. VP Dan Quayle. My guess is that with a lawyer's education, he knows how to spell "potato" but I wonder if he learned the other main lesson of his father's career in elected office - don't get into an argument with a fictional character...and lose?
...Tom Smith, founder of TASER (source: the same New Times' article linked to Ben Quayle's name)
...Ed Winkler, former Mayor of Paradise Valley. May have even less name rec than the current mayor, Vernon Parker. At 65, Winkler is 5 years older than Shadegg, the man who is retiring. Not sure what that says about either of them.
The above-named contenders would be dark horses even if they actually enter the race, but I'm going to throw out a name just for giggles who would make the above dark horses look like Secretariat (and if you don't understand that reference, you are too young for my cliches :) ).
John Keegan, the Justice of the Peace for the Arrowhead Justice Precinct. Keegan gained some notoriety early in 2009 for throwing out the photo radar-generated ticket received by AZGOP Executive Director Brett Mecum. He is also known for being married to GOP operative/former State Superintendant of Public Instruction Lisa Graham Keegan (who, I suppose, could also choose to make a run at CD3.) So far as I know, neither Keegan lives in CD3, but that is a non-factor under Arizona law.
Keegan announced that he won't be seeking reelection as a JP in order to re-enter private business or to "pursue some other opportunity."
CD3 would certainly qualify as "some other opportunity."
It should be noted that the above Keegan entry is purely idle speculation on my part. I have no concrete evidence that Keegan is even remotely interested in the CD3 seat, much less seriously mulling a run. He's just an elected official who isn't running for reelection to his current office.
That's just an open invitation to wiseass bloggers like me. :)
Edit on 1/31 to add something I forgot to add while I was originally writing this post:
Folks should also remember that Keegan was a candidate for CD2 in 2002, coming in a respectable 3rd in a seven-way Republican primary, behind Lisa Atkins and eventual winner Trent Franks.
...End edit...
The first group of names (Gorman et. al.) qualify as "first tier" candidates as except for Noble, they currently hold (or extremely recently held) elected offices in the district. Noble makes the "first tier" list if he enters the race because of his close ties to Shadegg - he used to be Shadegg's chief of staff.
The newer names qualify as "second tier" because they are first-time candidates (Quayle, Smith), former office holders (Winkler), or are from outside of the district (the Keegans.)
However, any of them could move into serious contention if they enter the race and have good advisors - Quayle and Smith have access to tons o' cash, Winkler may have light name rec in the district, but he does have some, and the Keegans, especially Lisa, have ties to John McCain and may be able to call on his support if Noble doesn't enter the race.
Of course, the GOP in CD3, especially that in LD11 (McCain's home LD), is so fractured that McCain's support could impede, not help, a candidate.
Heh heh heh - and it's only January. :)
In addition to the previously mentioned names of folks entering the Rep primary to replace John Shadegg in Congress (Sens. Gorman and Waring, Rep. Crump, Mayor Parker, and Blogger Noble), other, more obscure names have been floated as having an interest. I make no guarantees about the accuracy of these sources (including the one where I'm the source).
Some of the names that are out there -
...Benjamin Quayle, the lawyer son of former U.S. VP Dan Quayle. My guess is that with a lawyer's education, he knows how to spell "potato" but I wonder if he learned the other main lesson of his father's career in elected office - don't get into an argument with a fictional character...and lose?
...Tom Smith, founder of TASER (source: the same New Times' article linked to Ben Quayle's name)
...Ed Winkler, former Mayor of Paradise Valley. May have even less name rec than the current mayor, Vernon Parker. At 65, Winkler is 5 years older than Shadegg, the man who is retiring. Not sure what that says about either of them.
The above-named contenders would be dark horses even if they actually enter the race, but I'm going to throw out a name just for giggles who would make the above dark horses look like Secretariat (and if you don't understand that reference, you are too young for my cliches :) ).
John Keegan, the Justice of the Peace for the Arrowhead Justice Precinct. Keegan gained some notoriety early in 2009 for throwing out the photo radar-generated ticket received by AZGOP Executive Director Brett Mecum. He is also known for being married to GOP operative/former State Superintendant of Public Instruction Lisa Graham Keegan (who, I suppose, could also choose to make a run at CD3.) So far as I know, neither Keegan lives in CD3, but that is a non-factor under Arizona law.
Keegan announced that he won't be seeking reelection as a JP in order to re-enter private business or to "pursue some other opportunity."
CD3 would certainly qualify as "some other opportunity."
It should be noted that the above Keegan entry is purely idle speculation on my part. I have no concrete evidence that Keegan is even remotely interested in the CD3 seat, much less seriously mulling a run. He's just an elected official who isn't running for reelection to his current office.
That's just an open invitation to wiseass bloggers like me. :)
Edit on 1/31 to add something I forgot to add while I was originally writing this post:
Folks should also remember that Keegan was a candidate for CD2 in 2002, coming in a respectable 3rd in a seven-way Republican primary, behind Lisa Atkins and eventual winner Trent Franks.
...End edit...
The first group of names (Gorman et. al.) qualify as "first tier" candidates as except for Noble, they currently hold (or extremely recently held) elected offices in the district. Noble makes the "first tier" list if he enters the race because of his close ties to Shadegg - he used to be Shadegg's chief of staff.
The newer names qualify as "second tier" because they are first-time candidates (Quayle, Smith), former office holders (Winkler), or are from outside of the district (the Keegans.)
However, any of them could move into serious contention if they enter the race and have good advisors - Quayle and Smith have access to tons o' cash, Winkler may have light name rec in the district, but he does have some, and the Keegans, especially Lisa, have ties to John McCain and may be able to call on his support if Noble doesn't enter the race.
Of course, the GOP in CD3, especially that in LD11 (McCain's home LD), is so fractured that McCain's support could impede, not help, a candidate.
Heh heh heh - and it's only January. :)
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Shadegg retires...again
Congressman John Shadegg (R-CD3) has announced that he will not seek reelection this year. He made the same announcement two years ago, then reneged on it.
This time he reallyreallyreally means it, honest.
Note: any speculation about possible Republican candidates is just that - speculation. In case you couldn't tell (because my writing is *so* subtle :) ), I am NOT a Republican and have few, if any, sources among the Rs.
A quick rundown of some possible candidates to replace him (announced and speculated about):
Jon Hulburd, Democrat, is the only announced candidate thus far. He was gearing up to challenge Shadegg; now he has to shift gears slightly and adjust to running for an open seat.
Phil Gordon, Democrat. He's currently the Mayor of Phoenix and is termed limited next year, so he wants to move onward and upward. If he gets in and gains any traction in this race, it will be on the strength of his fundraising and campaign machine. Grassroots Dems do NOT like Gordon - he's endorsed too many really bad Rs (Jim Weiers, Andrew Thomas) to endear himself to neighborhood Democratic activists. Has the ego to jump in anyway.
Jim Waring, Republican. Currently a state senator. Was rumored to be interested two years ago, but backed off when Shadegg unretired. Currently "exploring" a run at State Treasurer, but may forego that for a shot at DC. If he goes for it, State Sen. Thayer Verschoor will probably go for the Treasurer's job. Of the R names listed here, he may be the best of a very bad lot. Very conservative, but not a knuckledragger.
Pam Gorman, Republican. Currently a state senator, and like Waring, was rumored to be interested two years ago. Currently on the outs with Senate leadership for her "more conservative than thou" grandstanding on the state budget last year, so she may be very interested this time around.
Sean Noble, Republican. Formerly Shadegg's chief of staff and has long been considered Shadegg's heir apparent. Writes the blog Noble Thinking.
Steve May, Republican. Former state legislator. Actually formed a committee in 2008 and briefly ran against Shadegg, but backed off when the support wasn't there. Very conservative, strong military background, but with one big flaw by Republican standards - he's openly gay. If he runs for office again, any office, he will have a tough row to hoe in any R primary. I don't think that he lives in the district, but that is a minor detail in AZ. Just ask Virginian Rick Renzi.
Sam Crump, Republican. Currently a state representative. Very conservative, very ambitious, not known for playing well with others - threatened to challenge House Speaker Kirk Adams on the budget, and like Gorman, got slapped down for his trouble (but only temporarily). Also started to mount a campaign for AG, trying to bump more established Rs Tom Horne and Andrew Thomas from the race. Recently backed away from that to run for reelection to the state House. Very likely to jump in here, regardless of who else jumps in.
Any teabagger (pick one, any one.) Don't know which one, but given the state of the current GOP, at least one will jump in.
Other possible but less likely candidates:
Perennial candidate Susan Bitter Smith (R), an industry lobbyist and currently president of the governing board of the Central Arizona Project. She doesn't live in the district, but may view an open seat as an easier target than Harry Mitchell in CD5.
The aforementioned Tom Horne (R), currently State Superintendent of Public Instruction and a candidate for Attorney General. Possible, but not likely - Andrew Thomas' travails (a polite word for "expected federal indictment") leave him a clear path at the R nod for AG. A CD3 primary would be far less of a good bet for him.
Bob Lord (D), who mounted a strong challenge to Shadegg in 2008. Word is that he has been advising fellow D Hulburd. Expended a lot of energy in 2008, and may not have another run in him. Yet.
Vernon Parker (R), Mayor of Paradise Valley and an announced candidate for Governor. Has an uphill battle in a statewide race with his low name recognition, but is one of the bigger names in the district. Pure speculation on my part, but I wanted to toss out a name that no one else has so far. :)
Tedski's take and speculations at Rum, Romanism, Rebellion, here.
Anybody have their own guesses? Feel free to leave them in a comment...
This time he reallyreallyreally means it, honest.
Note: any speculation about possible Republican candidates is just that - speculation. In case you couldn't tell (because my writing is *so* subtle :) ), I am NOT a Republican and have few, if any, sources among the Rs.
A quick rundown of some possible candidates to replace him (announced and speculated about):
Jon Hulburd, Democrat, is the only announced candidate thus far. He was gearing up to challenge Shadegg; now he has to shift gears slightly and adjust to running for an open seat.
Phil Gordon, Democrat. He's currently the Mayor of Phoenix and is termed limited next year, so he wants to move onward and upward. If he gets in and gains any traction in this race, it will be on the strength of his fundraising and campaign machine. Grassroots Dems do NOT like Gordon - he's endorsed too many really bad Rs (Jim Weiers, Andrew Thomas) to endear himself to neighborhood Democratic activists. Has the ego to jump in anyway.
Jim Waring, Republican. Currently a state senator. Was rumored to be interested two years ago, but backed off when Shadegg unretired. Currently "exploring" a run at State Treasurer, but may forego that for a shot at DC. If he goes for it, State Sen. Thayer Verschoor will probably go for the Treasurer's job. Of the R names listed here, he may be the best of a very bad lot. Very conservative, but not a knuckledragger.
Pam Gorman, Republican. Currently a state senator, and like Waring, was rumored to be interested two years ago. Currently on the outs with Senate leadership for her "more conservative than thou" grandstanding on the state budget last year, so she may be very interested this time around.
Sean Noble, Republican. Formerly Shadegg's chief of staff and has long been considered Shadegg's heir apparent. Writes the blog Noble Thinking.
Steve May, Republican. Former state legislator. Actually formed a committee in 2008 and briefly ran against Shadegg, but backed off when the support wasn't there. Very conservative, strong military background, but with one big flaw by Republican standards - he's openly gay. If he runs for office again, any office, he will have a tough row to hoe in any R primary. I don't think that he lives in the district, but that is a minor detail in AZ. Just ask Virginian Rick Renzi.
Sam Crump, Republican. Currently a state representative. Very conservative, very ambitious, not known for playing well with others - threatened to challenge House Speaker Kirk Adams on the budget, and like Gorman, got slapped down for his trouble (but only temporarily). Also started to mount a campaign for AG, trying to bump more established Rs Tom Horne and Andrew Thomas from the race. Recently backed away from that to run for reelection to the state House. Very likely to jump in here, regardless of who else jumps in.
Any teabagger (pick one, any one.) Don't know which one, but given the state of the current GOP, at least one will jump in.
Other possible but less likely candidates:
Perennial candidate Susan Bitter Smith (R), an industry lobbyist and currently president of the governing board of the Central Arizona Project. She doesn't live in the district, but may view an open seat as an easier target than Harry Mitchell in CD5.
The aforementioned Tom Horne (R), currently State Superintendent of Public Instruction and a candidate for Attorney General. Possible, but not likely - Andrew Thomas' travails (a polite word for "expected federal indictment") leave him a clear path at the R nod for AG. A CD3 primary would be far less of a good bet for him.
Bob Lord (D), who mounted a strong challenge to Shadegg in 2008. Word is that he has been advising fellow D Hulburd. Expended a lot of energy in 2008, and may not have another run in him. Yet.
Vernon Parker (R), Mayor of Paradise Valley and an announced candidate for Governor. Has an uphill battle in a statewide race with his low name recognition, but is one of the bigger names in the district. Pure speculation on my part, but I wanted to toss out a name that no one else has so far. :)
Tedski's take and speculations at Rum, Romanism, Rebellion, here.
Anybody have their own guesses? Feel free to leave them in a comment...
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Is Shadegg channelling his inner Hayworth?
We'll know for certain if Shadegg announces his retirement from Congress in order to start a career in talk radio (not that Hayworth had any real choice about the timing of his retirement from Congress :)) )...
From the Phoenix New Times -
Video below -
From the Phoenix New Times -
Congressman John Shadegg's theatrics on the floor of the House of Representatives are becoming almost legendary. By legendary, we mean borderline insane.The passage in the Congressional Record can be found here (first column, second complete paragraph).
Just over a week ago, the congressman brought a 7-month-old baby named Maddie to the floor with him to illustrate his outrage over the healthcare bill.
{snip}
While addressing members of Congress about the Justice Department's decision to try suspected 9/11 mastermind, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, and his Al Qaeda cronies in New York City, Shadegg had this to say:
"I saw the mayor of New York today. He said 'we're tough; we can do it.' Well mayor, how are you going to feel when it's your daughter that's kidnapped at school by a terrorist? How are you going to feel when it's some clerk -- some innocent clerk of the court -- whose daughter or son is kidnapped? Or the jailer's little brother or little sister?"
Video below -
Saturday, November 07, 2009
H.R. 3962 passes - YESSSSSS!
After more than 12 hours of debate on a Saturday, and nearly 100 years of delay, dallying, and outright obstruction, the House passed a significant health care reform measure.
With a tally of 220 in favor, 215 against, and none voting present or not voting, H.R. 3962 passed the House of Representatives. 39 Democrats crossed over and voted with the Republicans, while 1 Republican, Joseph Cao of Louisiana, voted with the majority Democrats.
All of AZ's Democrats voted in favor of health care reform; all of AZ's Republican opposed health care reform.
Harry Mitchell's statement of support (pre-vote) is here.
Gabrielle Giffords statement of support (pre-vote) here.
Ann Kirkpatrick's statement on her vote is here.
Jeff Flake's statement about his vote here.
Trent Franks' statement on the vote here.
The others, Pastor, Grijalva, and Shadegg, didn't have relevent statements up on their House websites as of the writing of this post.
Biggest disappointment: By a vote of 240 to 194, with 1 voting present (AZ's John Shadegg...more on that in a moment), the House amended H.R. 3962 with language proposed by Bart Stupak (D-MI) to ban payments for abortions under the public option.
Shadegg's plan behind the "present" vote was that by voting that way, he could help defeat the amendment without actually voting against it. He thought that would be a good tactic to defeat the underlying bill. He thought that the anti-choice amendment made the bill palatable for some reluctant Dems.
As for AZ's delegation, the five Democrats voted against the Stupak amendment while Republicans Franks and Flake voted in support. [Thanks to commenter Eli Blake for spotting the typo here. This is the corrected version.]
As was noted by most of the speakers who opposed the amendment, funding for abortions was already pretty much banned anyway (Section 222, or page 110 of this .pdf, courtesy of the House Rules Committee). Stupak's amendment was actually a ploy to whittle away at private access to a legal medical procedure.
One ray of hope here: The amendment could still be stripped out in conference committee, which will be needed because the Senate's version of health care reform is *somewhat* different than the House's.
There's a lot more to say on this, but my cold is kicking my butt, so let me close with this:
Thank you, Congresswomen Giffords, Congresswoman Kirkpatrick, Congressman Pastor, Congressman Grijalva, and especially (because he is my representative) Congressman Mitchell.
Your votes today to support the interests of your constituents ahead of the interests of big insurance companies illustrates why your constituents elected you in the first place.
And why they'll continue to elect you for as long as want to serve as their representatives.
Later...
With a tally of 220 in favor, 215 against, and none voting present or not voting, H.R. 3962 passed the House of Representatives. 39 Democrats crossed over and voted with the Republicans, while 1 Republican, Joseph Cao of Louisiana, voted with the majority Democrats.
All of AZ's Democrats voted in favor of health care reform; all of AZ's Republican opposed health care reform.
Harry Mitchell's statement of support (pre-vote) is here.
Gabrielle Giffords statement of support (pre-vote) here.
Ann Kirkpatrick's statement on her vote is here.
Jeff Flake's statement about his vote here.
Trent Franks' statement on the vote here.
The others, Pastor, Grijalva, and Shadegg, didn't have relevent statements up on their House websites as of the writing of this post.
Biggest disappointment: By a vote of 240 to 194, with 1 voting present (AZ's John Shadegg...more on that in a moment), the House amended H.R. 3962 with language proposed by Bart Stupak (D-MI) to ban payments for abortions under the public option.
Shadegg's plan behind the "present" vote was that by voting that way, he could help defeat the amendment without actually voting against it. He thought that would be a good tactic to defeat the underlying bill. He thought that the anti-choice amendment made the bill palatable for some reluctant Dems.
As for AZ's delegation, the five Democrats voted against the Stupak amendment while Republicans Franks and Flake voted in support. [Thanks to commenter Eli Blake for spotting the typo here. This is the corrected version.]
As was noted by most of the speakers who opposed the amendment, funding for abortions was already pretty much banned anyway (Section 222, or page 110 of this .pdf, courtesy of the House Rules Committee). Stupak's amendment was actually a ploy to whittle away at private access to a legal medical procedure.
One ray of hope here: The amendment could still be stripped out in conference committee, which will be needed because the Senate's version of health care reform is *somewhat* different than the House's.
There's a lot more to say on this, but my cold is kicking my butt, so let me close with this:
Thank you, Congresswomen Giffords, Congresswoman Kirkpatrick, Congressman Pastor, Congressman Grijalva, and especially (because he is my representative) Congressman Mitchell.
Your votes today to support the interests of your constituents ahead of the interests of big insurance companies illustrates why your constituents elected you in the first place.
And why they'll continue to elect you for as long as want to serve as their representatives.
Later...
Friday, October 09, 2009
John Shadegg, the CBO, and selective credibility
Note: for those readers unfamiliar with the abbreviation "CBO," it stands for Congressional Budget Office. The CBO provides non-partisan analyses to help Congress make decisions in budget and economic issues.
Congressman John Shadegg (R-AZ3) seems to have a creative definition of what constitutes a credible source of information.
When that source says something that he can use to support his ideological/industry lobbyist-funded positions, that source is credible.
When the same source says something the undermines his preferred position, he doesn't consider re-evaluating his position, he just attacks the source.
To whit, the CBO and the fiscal impact of health care reform.
From Shadegg in July, when he found the CBO to be credible -
With this sort of sloppiness coming forth from Shadegg, indicating that he is getting tired (somewhat reminiscent of JD Hayworth circa 2006, and we know how that turned out for Hayworth), it's time for him to consider sticking with it the next time he announces his retirement.
There are a number of Republicans - State Sens. Jim Waring and Pam Gorman, former Shadegg chief of staff Sean Noble, and others - rumored to be eyeing the seat, all waiting for the seat to open up (somebody who was going to run last year when Shadegg "retired," Steve May, probably won't be running in CD3 next time around. It looks like he may be running for a JP slot in the East Valley instead).
There are also a number of Democrats waiting for Shadegg to make his decision, any of whom could make it an interesting race (some even if Shadegg tries for one more term). Bob Lord probably has another run in him, and with the lessons he learned in last year's run against Shadegg, last year's "formidable challenge" could turn into "next year's victory."
So either way (Shadegg in, Shadegg out) CD3 is going to be interesting.
If Shadegg stays in the race, expect more from him like this (which means lots of blogging material).
If he retires, that means that there will be a scrum in north Phoenix next year, which also means lots of blogging material.
Stay tuned.
Congressman John Shadegg (R-AZ3) seems to have a creative definition of what constitutes a credible source of information.
When that source says something that he can use to support his ideological/industry lobbyist-funded positions, that source is credible.
When the same source says something the undermines his preferred position, he doesn't consider re-evaluating his position, he just attacks the source.
To whit, the CBO and the fiscal impact of health care reform.
From Shadegg in July, when he found the CBO to be credible -
Now, with only a single week to go before the August break, the CBO is estimating that despite the cost-cutting rhetoric, the House Democrats’ health care proposal will increase America’s deficit by $239 billion over the next ten years.From Shadegg in October (warning: the link is to RedState.com; prolonged exposure could result in brain damage :) ), where the CBO's analysis doesn't support his position any longer -
CBO Stands for Cooked Books Office
With this sort of sloppiness coming forth from Shadegg, indicating that he is getting tired (somewhat reminiscent of JD Hayworth circa 2006, and we know how that turned out for Hayworth), it's time for him to consider sticking with it the next time he announces his retirement.
There are a number of Republicans - State Sens. Jim Waring and Pam Gorman, former Shadegg chief of staff Sean Noble, and others - rumored to be eyeing the seat, all waiting for the seat to open up (somebody who was going to run last year when Shadegg "retired," Steve May, probably won't be running in CD3 next time around. It looks like he may be running for a JP slot in the East Valley instead).
There are also a number of Democrats waiting for Shadegg to make his decision, any of whom could make it an interesting race (some even if Shadegg tries for one more term). Bob Lord probably has another run in him, and with the lessons he learned in last year's run against Shadegg, last year's "formidable challenge" could turn into "next year's victory."
So either way (Shadegg in, Shadegg out) CD3 is going to be interesting.
If Shadegg stays in the race, expect more from him like this (which means lots of blogging material).
If he retires, that means that there will be a scrum in north Phoenix next year, which also means lots of blogging material.
Stay tuned.
Monday, October 05, 2009
John Shadegg - low profile even among his fellow Kool-Aid drinkers
This one is pretty minor, but still to funny to pass up....
From NaplesNews.com -
In other words, one of Congressman Shadegg's fellow travelers, just without the title "Congressman.".
Yet a later paragraph shows that Mr. Wimberley doesn't really have much of a clue about Arizona's native son (who seems to spend more time canoodling with out-of-state lobbying groups like the Heritage Foundation and the Club for Growth than he does working for his constituents). (emphasis mine)
From NaplesNews.com -
What do you say we move the capital out of Washington and transport it to Omaha or somewhere in the center of the nation where people still exhibit common sense and a deep-seated patriotism! Certainly this idea has crossed my mind more than once. If only we could completely shut down the bloated, intrusive, metastasized, arrogant federal government and reopen it somewhere in the Midwest under new management and dramatically scaled down. What a vision that would be!After reading that opening paragraph, most sstute readers will realize that the author of the piece, one Edward Wimberly, is as anti-government and anti-public services as even the most extreme winger in the Arizona Legislature (Ron Gould, perhaps?)
In other words, one of Congressman Shadegg's fellow travelers, just without the title "Congressman.".
Yet a later paragraph shows that Mr. Wimberley doesn't really have much of a clue about Arizona's native son (who seems to spend more time canoodling with out-of-state lobbying groups like the Heritage Foundation and the Club for Growth than he does working for his constituents). (emphasis mine)
This steady drain on the people’s rights has not gone unnoticed. For instance, a little known Congressman from Arizona by the name of James Shadegg has been introducing a bill entitled “The Enumerated Powers Act” every year since 1995 which would require the sponsors of every piece of legislation to specify just where in the Constitution the particular bill derives its authority.Maybe it really *is* time for Shadegg to retire. Between his lack of regard for the people who hired/voted for him, and the obvious lack of regard that his ideological peers have for him, it's likely that no one will miss him when he's gone.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
The U.S. House admonishes Rep. Joe Wilson (R-Sons of Confederate Veterans)
By a vote of 240 - 179, with 5 present and 10 members not voting, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to "disapprove" of Rep. Joe Wilson's behavior during President Obama's speech to a joint session of Congress last week. Reuters coverage here.
In case you have a really short memory, Wilson is the South Carolina Republican who shouted "you lie!" at the President during the speech.
The vote was almost totally along party lines, with only 12 Democrats crossing over to vote against the resolution disapproving of Wilson's breach of House decorum and only 7 Republicans voting to support the resolution.
In a curious twist, 2 of the 19 crossovers came from AZ - Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ8) voted against, and Jeff Flake (R-AZ6) voted for it.
From Giffords' statement on the vote -
Even though Bush wasn't speaking when the criticisms were issued.
Even though there is a big difference between saying "No!" (in response to President Bush's call to "reform" (aka "privatize") Social Security and screaming "You lie!"
Even though none of the Democratic "transgressions" that he cited ever inspired a similar rebuke, despite the fact that they occurred during a period when Shadegg's Republicans controlled the House. If any Democrats had even *looked* over the line between decorous and indecorous behavior, the punishments would have been swift and much harsher than mere "disapproval."
For what it's worth, if I was a member of the House, like Congresswoman Giffords, I'd have voted against the resolution.
Not because I'm a nice guy or a budding statesman (I'm not) and not because I support Wilson's behavior (he's a bigoted thug who should do the world a favor and slither back under whatever rock he was hatched under).
Nope, I'd have voted against the measure so that I could be as uncivil toward Wilson and his ilk as they are toward President Obama and the Democrats.
Toldja I'm not a nice guy. :)
Of course, that thinking probably isn't unique to me, and probably contributed to the passage of the resolution. Most Democratic members of the House are far more mature than I am, and realize what kind of damage that attitude would do to the remaining civility in the House.
However, if such a situation were to come to pass (you know, me in the House voting against a similar resolution), I can promise one thing.
Whenever I called someone a liar (or corrupt, or bigoted, or whatever), I'd have evidence with me and wouldn't, you know, lie when calling someone else a liar. Like Joe Wilson did. See section 246 of H.R. 3200.
Relevant phrase - "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States."
Tedski's take at R-Cubed here;
Later...
In case you have a really short memory, Wilson is the South Carolina Republican who shouted "you lie!" at the President during the speech.
The vote was almost totally along party lines, with only 12 Democrats crossing over to vote against the resolution disapproving of Wilson's breach of House decorum and only 7 Republicans voting to support the resolution.
In a curious twist, 2 of the 19 crossovers came from AZ - Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ8) voted against, and Jeff Flake (R-AZ6) voted for it.
From Giffords' statement on the vote -
It is unfortunate that Congressman Wilson has not apologized to our colleagues for his rude outburst. He should. Heckling the President of the United States while he is addressing a joint session of Congress is totally unacceptable for a member of this body. The American people know this and Congressman Wilson knows this – that is why he apologized to President Obama. We should not waste any more time on this matter. We need to stay focused on health insurance reform and improving our economy.From Flake's statement on the vote -
Congressman Wilson is a good man, and I have confidence that his apology to President Obama was sincere,” said Flake. “However, his actions violated the rules of decorum of the House of Representatives.John Shadegg (R-Big Insurance) also has a statement out there, but it's a little less statesman-like than the other two ("stateswoman-like" in Giffords' case) - he blames the Democrats for the outburst, conflating Wilson's direct and personal insult of the President in the House chamber (interrupting and heckling President Obama) with Democratic criticisms of then-President Bush.
While the tenor of political debate seems to get more disrespectful every year, the floor of the House of Representatives has always provided a welcome respite. Even the fiercest political opponents refer to each other as ‘gentleman’ and afford one another civility and respect. We need to uphold that tradition.
Despite my suspicion that this resolution was driven as much by partisan politics as upholding precedent, I believe that it’s important to maintain the rules of decorum in the House and I supported its passage.
Even though Bush wasn't speaking when the criticisms were issued.
Even though there is a big difference between saying "No!" (in response to President Bush's call to "reform" (aka "privatize") Social Security and screaming "You lie!"
Even though none of the Democratic "transgressions" that he cited ever inspired a similar rebuke, despite the fact that they occurred during a period when Shadegg's Republicans controlled the House. If any Democrats had even *looked* over the line between decorous and indecorous behavior, the punishments would have been swift and much harsher than mere "disapproval."
For what it's worth, if I was a member of the House, like Congresswoman Giffords, I'd have voted against the resolution.
Not because I'm a nice guy or a budding statesman (I'm not) and not because I support Wilson's behavior (he's a bigoted thug who should do the world a favor and slither back under whatever rock he was hatched under).
Nope, I'd have voted against the measure so that I could be as uncivil toward Wilson and his ilk as they are toward President Obama and the Democrats.
Toldja I'm not a nice guy. :)
Of course, that thinking probably isn't unique to me, and probably contributed to the passage of the resolution. Most Democratic members of the House are far more mature than I am, and realize what kind of damage that attitude would do to the remaining civility in the House.
However, if such a situation were to come to pass (you know, me in the House voting against a similar resolution), I can promise one thing.
Whenever I called someone a liar (or corrupt, or bigoted, or whatever), I'd have evidence with me and wouldn't, you know, lie when calling someone else a liar. Like Joe Wilson did. See section 246 of H.R. 3200.
Relevant phrase - "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States."
Tedski's take at R-Cubed here;
Later...
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Congressman Harry Mitchell on Health Care Reform
Courtesy an email sent today -
Let me translate this into English -
Those of you reading this who support health care reform should contact Harry and let him know (politely) that you support a public option in any health care reform package, and urge him to support it too.
And for those of you who live in other CDs -
CD1 - Ann Kirkpatrick's contact page is here; she can use the encouragement too.
CD2 - Trent Franks' page is here; I don't expect it to help, but why not let him know that there are more than Kool Aid drinkers in his district?
CD3 - John Shadegg's page is here; ditto.
CD4 - Ed Pastor's contact page is here; I expect him to support a decent bill if one makes it to the floor, but I'm sure a "Thank You, Congressman Pastor" would be appreciated.
CD6 - Jeff Flake's contact page is here; Franks or Shadegg are more likely to vote for health care reform than Flake (and there isn't a snowball's chance in Phoenix of either of them voting for it), but whatthehell...
CD7 - Raul Grijalva's contact page is here; like Pastor, he is probably going to vote for it when it reaches the House floor, but a word of thanks would be appreciated.
CD8 - Gabrielle Giffords' contact page is here; as with Ann Kirkpatrick and Harry Mitchell, she can probably use a little encouragement.
Later...
Dear [cpmaz],
As you may be aware, Congress has begun to debate health insurance reform and may have a vote on a reform bill as early as the end of July. Currently, there is a bill being processed in the U.S. House of Representatives, H.R. 3200, the America’s Affordable Health Choices Act, and there are two bills making their way through the U.S. Senate. While I continue to review these proposals, you, too, can read these bills in their current forms here.
As I meet with people throughout the district, it seems that everyone has a personal story about health care. Like most Americans, I believe that rising costs and the threat of losing coverage is cause for great concern. There are too many examples of folks being denied the care their doctor prescribes because their insurance company says no, or of businesses being unable to create more jobs because the cost of health insurance will bust their budget, or of parents who cannot afford to pay for routine medical treatment to keep themselves and their children healthy.
Those conversations, along with recommendations received from doctors, nurses, patients, and health care providers in Arizona have convinced me that our system needs reform. In fact, since 2000, health care premiums have more than doubled and small businesses have faced a 129 percent increase in health care costs.
Let me be clear, I believe reform needs to protect what works and fix what doesn't. Reform should not only improve access to affordable and quality care for all Americans, but it also needs to preserve individual choice and protect competition in the marketplace. Reform should not leave individuals with fewer options, should not add to the national deficit, and should not leave doctors with inconsistent and low reimbursement rates as is often the case with Medicare.While content of H.R. 3200, the America’s Affordable Choices Act, continues to be amended in committee, I will be reviewing and monitoring changes before I decide whether I will support this legislation. However, there are important benchmarks that should be met in order to gain my support:
• Choice: Reform must preserve patient choice. You should be able to choose your own coverage and doctors. If you like them you should be able to keep them, even if you change or lose your job or move to a new state. And you should be free to change coverage as you see fit.
• Competition: Reform should encourage competition and should not leave individuals with fewer options. In its current form, H.R. 3200 contains a public alternative that is funded at the same rate of Medicare which is troubling for patients, doctors, and hospitals alike. For example, in 2008, Scottsdale Healthcare lost $56 million in Medicare underpayments. While a public alternative, if designed carefully and properly, may help increase competition, one that reimburses according to Medicare rates could undercut private plans, weaken the financial stability of local hospitals and potentially leave individuals with fewer options.
• Small business: Reform must not overburden small businesses that create jobs that are essential in jump starting Arizona’s economy. According to The Arizona Republic, while small businesses make up 73 percent of Arizona businesses, only 32 percent of Arizona small businesses provided health coverage benefits in 2006, down from 50 percent in 2000. Health care reform should not exacerbate the problems small businesses are currently facing.
• Affordability, wellness, technology and best practices: Reform should ensure that our health care system is affordable and covers pre-existing conditions. To ensure the highest quality of care for all Americans, reform should reward healthy lifestyles and personal responsibility, and take full advantage of technological advances and best practices that will help reduce costs for doctors, hospitals, and insurance companies.
Finally, I also believe that in the long term reform should not add to the national deficit. I believe that much of the cost of instituting reform should come from savings within the current system, by eliminating waste and inefficiencies, yet there may likely be the need find additional revenue sources to pay for it. As a member of Congress with a strong record of opposing tax increases, I will closely watch the debate on paying for reform.
As the debate in Congress continues, I value your input and ideas. I encourage you to visit my healthcare resource page on my website to receive more information about the health care reform process and invite you to contact my office to share your story and opinion.
Sincerely,
Harry
Let me translate this into English -
Those of you reading this who support health care reform should contact Harry and let him know (politely) that you support a public option in any health care reform package, and urge him to support it too.
And for those of you who live in other CDs -
CD1 - Ann Kirkpatrick's contact page is here; she can use the encouragement too.
CD2 - Trent Franks' page is here; I don't expect it to help, but why not let him know that there are more than Kool Aid drinkers in his district?
CD3 - John Shadegg's page is here; ditto.
CD4 - Ed Pastor's contact page is here; I expect him to support a decent bill if one makes it to the floor, but I'm sure a "Thank You, Congressman Pastor" would be appreciated.
CD6 - Jeff Flake's contact page is here; Franks or Shadegg are more likely to vote for health care reform than Flake (and there isn't a snowball's chance in Phoenix of either of them voting for it), but whatthehell...
CD7 - Raul Grijalva's contact page is here; like Pastor, he is probably going to vote for it when it reaches the House floor, but a word of thanks would be appreciated.
CD8 - Gabrielle Giffords' contact page is here; as with Ann Kirkpatrick and Harry Mitchell, she can probably use a little encouragement.
Later...
Sunday, June 21, 2009
AZ U.S. House members' budgets
Info courtesy Politico.
The linked article is dated June 19, so for the sake of easy math, I'm assuming the numbers are current as of June 15. The presumption is that the amount spent represents the amount spent through 5.5 months of a 12-month year, 0r 45.83% of the year.
That might not be perfectly accurate (I don't know for sure what Politico's cut-off date was), but since everyone is subject to the same assumption, it works for comparison's sake.
Representative
2009 Allotment ($)
Total Spent ($)
% of budget spent
Jeff Flake (R-AZ6.)
1,559,332.00
301,492.87
19.33%
Trent Franks (R-AZ2)
1,604,247.00
278,691.39
17.37%
Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ8)
1,527,622.00
270,642.79
17.72%
Raul Grijalva (D-AZ7)
1,508,218.00
276,943.30
18.36%
Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ1)
1,515,010.00
135,196.04
8.92%
Harry Mitchell (D-AZ5)
1,515,410.00
264,989.60
17.49%
Ed Pastor (D-AZ4)
1,483,786.00
268,599.51
18.1%
John Shadegg (R-AZ3)
1,512,691.00
298,370.28
19.72%
Other than a few outliers (like Kirkpatrick's <9%), the AZ delegation and Congress as a whole is pretty consistent. At nearly the halfway point of the year, most House members have spent 17 - 21% of their budgets, leading me to believe that either -
1. Some of their bigger expenses are yet to come; or
2. Their office budgets are incredibly inflated, perhaps so that members can generate good press in December with press releases touting their frugality as evidenced by how much money they are returning at the end of the year.
The linked article is dated June 19, so for the sake of easy math, I'm assuming the numbers are current as of June 15. The presumption is that the amount spent represents the amount spent through 5.5 months of a 12-month year, 0r 45.83% of the year.
That might not be perfectly accurate (I don't know for sure what Politico's cut-off date was), but since everyone is subject to the same assumption, it works for comparison's sake.
Representative
2009 Allotment ($)
Total Spent ($)
% of budget spent
Jeff Flake (R-AZ6.)
1,559,332.00
301,492.87
19.33%
Trent Franks (R-AZ2)
1,604,247.00
278,691.39
17.37%
Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ8)
1,527,622.00
270,642.79
17.72%
Raul Grijalva (D-AZ7)
1,508,218.00
276,943.30
18.36%
Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ1)
1,515,010.00
135,196.04
8.92%
Harry Mitchell (D-AZ5)
1,515,410.00
264,989.60
17.49%
Ed Pastor (D-AZ4)
1,483,786.00
268,599.51
18.1%
John Shadegg (R-AZ3)
1,512,691.00
298,370.28
19.72%
Other than a few outliers (like Kirkpatrick's <9%), the AZ delegation and Congress as a whole is pretty consistent. At nearly the halfway point of the year, most House members have spent 17 - 21% of their budgets, leading me to believe that either -
1. Some of their bigger expenses are yet to come; or
2. Their office budgets are incredibly inflated, perhaps so that members can generate good press in December with press releases touting their frugality as evidenced by how much money they are returning at the end of the year.
Monday, May 18, 2009
Shadegg and Flake can't *both* change their names to "Scrooge", can they?
Earlier today, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H. Res. 442, a resolution "[r]ecognizing the importance of the Child and Adult Care Food Program and its positive effect on the lives of low income children and families."
The bill passed by a vote of 377 - 10.
Now this resolution has absolutely no practical effect on the laws of the country or federal spending. In fact, it was such an innocuous and non-controversial bill that even Trent Franks (R-AZ2) could find it in his heart to support it.
Trent Franks!!!
However, Franks was alone among the AZGOPers - Jeff Flake (R-AZ6) and John Shadegg (R-AZ3) voted against this resolution. Apparently, the hardcore ideologues are so opposed to any government social programs that benefit low income Americans that they won't even vote to acknowledge the success or even the necessity of one of those programs.
I sort of understand Flake's perspective - he hates everything. But what's up with Shadegg? He's enough of a politician to occasionally vote for bills that are of the "feel good but meaningless” variety.
Perhaps Shadegg is trying to get back in the good graces of the conservative wing of the GOP after his bout of honesty last week.
Later...
The bill passed by a vote of 377 - 10.
Now this resolution has absolutely no practical effect on the laws of the country or federal spending. In fact, it was such an innocuous and non-controversial bill that even Trent Franks (R-AZ2) could find it in his heart to support it.
Trent Franks!!!
However, Franks was alone among the AZGOPers - Jeff Flake (R-AZ6) and John Shadegg (R-AZ3) voted against this resolution. Apparently, the hardcore ideologues are so opposed to any government social programs that benefit low income Americans that they won't even vote to acknowledge the success or even the necessity of one of those programs.
I sort of understand Flake's perspective - he hates everything. But what's up with Shadegg? He's enough of a politician to occasionally vote for bills that are of the "feel good but meaningless” variety.
Perhaps Shadegg is trying to get back in the good graces of the conservative wing of the GOP after his bout of honesty last week.
Later...
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Arizona's Congressional delegation and the stimulus bill...
On Friday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a compromise version of H.R. 1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The final vote was 246-183, with one answering 'present.' All House Republicans voted against the bill, and all but seven Democrats voted for the bill. All of AZ's Democratic representatives voted for it.
Later on Friday over in the Senate, the same compromise version was passed by a 60 - 38 vote. All Democrats present voted for the bill (Ted Kennedy was out, and Al Franken hasn't been seated yet), as well as Republicans Olympia Snow, Susan Collins (both from Maine) and Arlen Specter (PA). Both of AZ's Republican senators, Jon Kyl and John McCain, voted against the economic stimulus package.
AZ's delegation on the stimulus bill, in their own words (from news coverage, press releases, and the Congressional Record) -
Rep. Harry Mitchell (D-CD5), from a press release, courtesy Arizona Congress Watch - “Arizona’s job losses last year were worse than every other state but one. People are facing foreclosure and struggling to make ends meet,” said Mitchell. “The risk of inaction is too great. This bill will create and maintain jobs and we must take this step to get people back to work and get the economy back on track.”
Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-CD7), from a press release - “I voted to support today’s Recovery Act, a bill that is far from perfect, but opens up possibilities for many...The State of Arizona is in a budget crisis that it is translating to cuts in the Department of Economic Security, slashed departments at our public universities and colleges, money taken from our children in elementary, junior high, and high schools, and increases in hunger, poverty, and the ranks of the uninsured. The Recovery Act will help stop this kind of hemorrhaging, which is why I support it."
Rep. John Shadegg (R-CD3), from a press release -
"But one of the bill’s worst provisions has gone almost unnoticed, dangerously lurking below the radar of those exposing the bill’s flaws.
“Comparative Effectiveness Research,” sounds innocuous, but big-government programs always do. The $1.1 billion of the stimulus package earmarked for this project is a significant step toward government-run healthcare
Shadegg from a post in The Hill's CongressBlog, titled "Friday The 13th Horror" - "But of course the greatest horror is not the process – it is the product. At the end of the day we have an economic stimulus without economic stimulus."
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-CD8), as quoted in the Arizona Daily Star - 'The legislation will create or save 3.5 million jobs nationally over the next two years. Approximately 70,000 of those jobs will be in Arizona," she said in a press statement.'
The same article goes on to list a series of informational forums that Giffords will be part of, including one on Tuesday at ASU from noon - 1:30 p.m with CD5's Representative Harry Mitchell. (Pima Room in the Memorial Union)
More info on the forums, courtesy Congresswoman Giffords' website here.
Rep. Jeff Flake (R-CD6), from the Congressional Record - "We know enough about this legislation to know that it is bad legislation. First and foremost, the process is bad, but it’s bad legislation...I doubt that John Maynard Keynes would believe that $50 million for the
National Endowment for the Arts would be stimulative. All that it stimulates is more spending later."
Sen. Jon Kyl (R), from the Congressional Record - ...His speech is too long to find one good quote, so I recommend reading it in its entirety at the link. He opposed the bill for a litany of reasons, including ACORN, Filipino veterans, a maglev rail line from L.A. to Las Vegas, money for small shipyards (and not enough $ for big shipyards), and the Davis-Bacon Act (prevailing wage).
Sen. John McCain (R), was quoted as calling the bill "generational theft" on CNN and elsewhere. (NY Times)
President Obama is expected to sign the bill on Tuesday in Denver, and will be in Phoenix on Wednesday to announce a plan to fight home foreclosures. Details as they become available.
Note: In the future, I expect to leave this sort of post to Stacy at AZ Congress Watch - it took longer just to set up the links than to write the rest of the post.
Later on Friday over in the Senate, the same compromise version was passed by a 60 - 38 vote. All Democrats present voted for the bill (Ted Kennedy was out, and Al Franken hasn't been seated yet), as well as Republicans Olympia Snow, Susan Collins (both from Maine) and Arlen Specter (PA). Both of AZ's Republican senators, Jon Kyl and John McCain, voted against the economic stimulus package.
AZ's delegation on the stimulus bill, in their own words (from news coverage, press releases, and the Congressional Record) -
Rep. Harry Mitchell (D-CD5), from a press release, courtesy Arizona Congress Watch - “Arizona’s job losses last year were worse than every other state but one. People are facing foreclosure and struggling to make ends meet,” said Mitchell. “The risk of inaction is too great. This bill will create and maintain jobs and we must take this step to get people back to work and get the economy back on track.”
Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-CD7), from a press release - “I voted to support today’s Recovery Act, a bill that is far from perfect, but opens up possibilities for many...The State of Arizona is in a budget crisis that it is translating to cuts in the Department of Economic Security, slashed departments at our public universities and colleges, money taken from our children in elementary, junior high, and high schools, and increases in hunger, poverty, and the ranks of the uninsured. The Recovery Act will help stop this kind of hemorrhaging, which is why I support it."
Rep. John Shadegg (R-CD3), from a press release -
"But one of the bill’s worst provisions has gone almost unnoticed, dangerously lurking below the radar of those exposing the bill’s flaws.
“Comparative Effectiveness Research,” sounds innocuous, but big-government programs always do. The $1.1 billion of the stimulus package earmarked for this project is a significant step toward government-run healthcare
Shadegg from a post in The Hill's CongressBlog, titled "Friday The 13th Horror" - "But of course the greatest horror is not the process – it is the product. At the end of the day we have an economic stimulus without economic stimulus."
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-CD8), as quoted in the Arizona Daily Star - 'The legislation will create or save 3.5 million jobs nationally over the next two years. Approximately 70,000 of those jobs will be in Arizona," she said in a press statement.'
The same article goes on to list a series of informational forums that Giffords will be part of, including one on Tuesday at ASU from noon - 1:30 p.m with CD5's Representative Harry Mitchell. (Pima Room in the Memorial Union)
More info on the forums, courtesy Congresswoman Giffords' website here.
Rep. Jeff Flake (R-CD6), from the Congressional Record - "We know enough about this legislation to know that it is bad legislation. First and foremost, the process is bad, but it’s bad legislation...I doubt that John Maynard Keynes would believe that $50 million for the
National Endowment for the Arts would be stimulative. All that it stimulates is more spending later."
Sen. Jon Kyl (R), from the Congressional Record - ...His speech is too long to find one good quote, so I recommend reading it in its entirety at the link. He opposed the bill for a litany of reasons, including ACORN, Filipino veterans, a maglev rail line from L.A. to Las Vegas, money for small shipyards (and not enough $ for big shipyards), and the Davis-Bacon Act (prevailing wage).
Sen. John McCain (R), was quoted as calling the bill "generational theft" on CNN and elsewhere. (NY Times)
President Obama is expected to sign the bill on Tuesday in Denver, and will be in Phoenix on Wednesday to announce a plan to fight home foreclosures. Details as they become available.
Note: In the future, I expect to leave this sort of post to Stacy at AZ Congress Watch - it took longer just to set up the links than to write the rest of the post.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Arizona's week in Congress...
Just passed and upcoming...
In floor votes -
- The House passed H. J. Res. 3, " Relating to the disapproval of obligations under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008" by a vote of 270 - 155. Among Arizona's delegation, Flake, Franks, Kirkpatrick, Mitchell, and Shadegg voted yes, Grijalva, Giffords, and Pastor voted no. (According to the CRS summary for the proposal, the resolution "Declares that Congress disapproves the obligation of any funds that exceed specified amounts authorized for the purchase of troubled assets by the Secretary of the Treasury under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.")
- The House passed H.R. 58, "Commending the University of Florida Gators for winning the Bowl Championship Series National Championship Game." Normally this sort of motion is passed by voice vote or unanimously, but for this one, five Congressmen, including AZ's Jeff Flake, voted against it.
- The House passed H.R. 384, the TARP Reform and Accountability Act of 2009, by a vote of 260 - 166. AZ delegation: Giffords, Grijalva, Mitchell, and Pastor voted in favor; Flake, Franks, Kirkpatrick, and Shadegg opposed.
...In an almost unheard-of development, a Jeff Flake-sponsored amendment was actually added to H.R. 384, by voice vote of all things. The amendment clarified "that the TARP Special Inspector General has oversight power over any actions taken by Treasury under this legislation that he deems appropriate, with certain exceptions."
Floor speeches -
- Jeff Flake spoke in favor of H.J.Res. 3 and in favor of his amendment to H.R. 384 (yes, he later voted against the underlying bill, but let's not quibble - Jeff Flake got an amendment passed!
- Trent Franks was one of a number of Republican Congressmen who took 40 minutes of floor time to reminsce about the recently ended presidential administration of George W. Bush.
-Raul Grijalva participated in a "special order" speech on the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
Sponsorships -
- Jeff Flake (R-CD6) sponsored H.R. 640 ( To require the President to transmit to Congress a report on every program of the Federal Government that authorizes or requires the gathering of information on United States persons in the United States, established whether in whole or in part pursuant to the "all necessary and appropriate force" clause contained in the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) ), H.R. 641 (To limit the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to acquire land located in a State in which 25 percent or more of all land in the State is already owned by the United States, aka the No Net Loss of Private Land Act) and H.R. 642 (To provide opportunities for continued recreational shooting on certain Federal public land, aka the Recreational Shooting Protection Act ).
- Gabrielle Giffords (D-CD8) sponsored H.R. 662 (To evaluate and extend the basic pilot program for employment eligibility confirmation and to ensure the protection of Social Security beneficiaries, aka Employee Verification Amendment Act of 2009).
- Raul Grijalva (D-CD7) sponsored H.R. 644 (To withdraw the Tusayan Ranger District and Federal land managed by the Bureau of Land Management in the vicinity of Kanab Creek and in House Rock Valley from location, entry, and patent under the mining laws, aka the Grand Canyon Watersheds Protection Act of 2009).
Upcoming week - The highlights of the coming week are the Senate version of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, S. 181, and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The last vote is expected on Wednesday due to the Republican Issues Conference on Thursday and Friday. There will also be votes on creating a "National Data Privacy Day" and "Honoring the heroic actions of the pilot, crew, and rescuers of US Airways Flight 1549" (aka - The Hudson River landing folks).
Stacy at AZ Congress Watch has been doing great work on the Congresscritters' press releases/media coverage, and those who want issue-specific quotes should check it out.
Later!
In floor votes -
- The House passed H. J. Res. 3, " Relating to the disapproval of obligations under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008" by a vote of 270 - 155. Among Arizona's delegation, Flake, Franks, Kirkpatrick, Mitchell, and Shadegg voted yes, Grijalva, Giffords, and Pastor voted no. (According to the CRS summary for the proposal, the resolution "Declares that Congress disapproves the obligation of any funds that exceed specified amounts authorized for the purchase of troubled assets by the Secretary of the Treasury under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.")
- The House passed H.R. 58, "Commending the University of Florida Gators for winning the Bowl Championship Series National Championship Game." Normally this sort of motion is passed by voice vote or unanimously, but for this one, five Congressmen, including AZ's Jeff Flake, voted against it.
- The House passed H.R. 384, the TARP Reform and Accountability Act of 2009, by a vote of 260 - 166. AZ delegation: Giffords, Grijalva, Mitchell, and Pastor voted in favor; Flake, Franks, Kirkpatrick, and Shadegg opposed.
...In an almost unheard-of development, a Jeff Flake-sponsored amendment was actually added to H.R. 384, by voice vote of all things. The amendment clarified "that the TARP Special Inspector General has oversight power over any actions taken by Treasury under this legislation that he deems appropriate, with certain exceptions."
Floor speeches -
- Jeff Flake spoke in favor of H.J.Res. 3 and in favor of his amendment to H.R. 384 (yes, he later voted against the underlying bill, but let's not quibble - Jeff Flake got an amendment passed!
- Trent Franks was one of a number of Republican Congressmen who took 40 minutes of floor time to reminsce about the recently ended presidential administration of George W. Bush.
-Raul Grijalva participated in a "special order" speech on the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
Sponsorships -
- Jeff Flake (R-CD6) sponsored H.R. 640 ( To require the President to transmit to Congress a report on every program of the Federal Government that authorizes or requires the gathering of information on United States persons in the United States, established whether in whole or in part pursuant to the "all necessary and appropriate force" clause contained in the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) ), H.R. 641 (To limit the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to acquire land located in a State in which 25 percent or more of all land in the State is already owned by the United States, aka the No Net Loss of Private Land Act) and H.R. 642 (To provide opportunities for continued recreational shooting on certain Federal public land, aka the Recreational Shooting Protection Act ).
- Gabrielle Giffords (D-CD8) sponsored H.R. 662 (To evaluate and extend the basic pilot program for employment eligibility confirmation and to ensure the protection of Social Security beneficiaries, aka Employee Verification Amendment Act of 2009).
- Raul Grijalva (D-CD7) sponsored H.R. 644 (To withdraw the Tusayan Ranger District and Federal land managed by the Bureau of Land Management in the vicinity of Kanab Creek and in House Rock Valley from location, entry, and patent under the mining laws, aka the Grand Canyon Watersheds Protection Act of 2009).
Upcoming week - The highlights of the coming week are the Senate version of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, S. 181, and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The last vote is expected on Wednesday due to the Republican Issues Conference on Thursday and Friday. There will also be votes on creating a "National Data Privacy Day" and "Honoring the heroic actions of the pilot, crew, and rescuers of US Airways Flight 1549" (aka - The Hudson River landing folks).
Stacy at AZ Congress Watch has been doing great work on the Congresscritters' press releases/media coverage, and those who want issue-specific quotes should check it out.
Later!
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Arizona's week in the House in review
...Stacy over at AZ Congress Watch does a good job of keeping up with this stuff (though not this week :) ). This is just a summary.
This upcoming week will be a fairly short one, with the first half of the week being taken up with Inauguration activities and the MLK holiday and with the expectation that the House will finish its legislative business by Thursday evening.
Last week, however, had some activity of note -
Over in the House, work started on H.R. 384, a bill to reform the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP). A number of amendments were heard (some passed, some didn't), and more are scheduled for this coming week. The highlight for AZ'ers in that area is a proposal by Jeff Flake (R-CD6) to expand the powers of the TARP's Special Inspector General.
That one is expected to be heard on Wednesday or Thursday.
In other business, the House passed H.R. 2, the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 by a vote of 289 - 139. The AZ delegation voted along party lines - Democrats Giffords, Grijalva, Kirkpatrick, Mitchell, and Pastor in favor; Republicans Flake, Franks, and Shadegg against.
Bill sponsorships...
Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-CD8) sponsored three bills - H.R. 551 (study of water augmentation alternatives in the Sierra Vista Subwatershed), H.R. 552 (to designate the Arizona National Scenic Trail), and H.R. 576 (a refundable investment credit, and 5-year depreciation, for property used to manufacture solar energy property). The text of the bills aren't available online yet.
Congressman Harry Mitchell sponsored H.R. 498, a bill to make permanent some capital gains and estate tax cuts.
Floor speech action...
...Giffords urged her colleagues to vote 'yes' in a 'one-minute' speech in support of H.R. 2. Her press release on the bill is here.
...During debate on H.R. 2, Congressman John Shadegg (R-CD3) spoke against passage of the bill.
...Mitchell also gave a 'one-minute' on H.R. 156, his bill to block Congress' automatic pay raise.
"Extensions of Remarks" (statements submitted for the record)...
...Mitchell gave his reasons for sponsoring H.R. 498, a bill to make permanent recent cap gains and estate tax cuts.
...Mitchell also lauded Dave Graybill and the Pink Heals Tour, an organization dedicated to raising breast cancer awareness.
Press releases (all from House websites)...
...Jeff Flake highlighted his "egregious earmark of the week" here and his bill to deport illegal immigrants convicted of DUI here.
...Trent Franks' (R-CD2) press secretary was prolific this week, producing releases on Franks' vote against H.R. 2, criticizing the New York Times' article blowing the whistle on some U.S. efforts against Iran and Israeli requests for specialized weapons to use against Iran, and commemorating the fourth anniversary of a peace agreement in Sudan.
...Raul Grijalva (D-CD7) expressed his support of the SCHIP renewal bill.
...Ann Kirkpatrick (D-CD1) may have had some press releases this week, but as a freshman Member of Congress, her House website is going to suck until spring. Possibly late spring.
This upcoming week will be a fairly short one, with the first half of the week being taken up with Inauguration activities and the MLK holiday and with the expectation that the House will finish its legislative business by Thursday evening.
Last week, however, had some activity of note -
Over in the House, work started on H.R. 384, a bill to reform the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP). A number of amendments were heard (some passed, some didn't), and more are scheduled for this coming week. The highlight for AZ'ers in that area is a proposal by Jeff Flake (R-CD6) to expand the powers of the TARP's Special Inspector General.
That one is expected to be heard on Wednesday or Thursday.
In other business, the House passed H.R. 2, the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 by a vote of 289 - 139. The AZ delegation voted along party lines - Democrats Giffords, Grijalva, Kirkpatrick, Mitchell, and Pastor in favor; Republicans Flake, Franks, and Shadegg against.
Bill sponsorships...
Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-CD8) sponsored three bills - H.R. 551 (study of water augmentation alternatives in the Sierra Vista Subwatershed), H.R. 552 (to designate the Arizona National Scenic Trail), and H.R. 576 (a refundable investment credit, and 5-year depreciation, for property used to manufacture solar energy property). The text of the bills aren't available online yet.
Congressman Harry Mitchell sponsored H.R. 498, a bill to make permanent some capital gains and estate tax cuts.
Floor speech action...
...Giffords urged her colleagues to vote 'yes' in a 'one-minute' speech in support of H.R. 2. Her press release on the bill is here.
...During debate on H.R. 2, Congressman John Shadegg (R-CD3) spoke against passage of the bill.
...Mitchell also gave a 'one-minute' on H.R. 156, his bill to block Congress' automatic pay raise.
"Extensions of Remarks" (statements submitted for the record)...
...Mitchell gave his reasons for sponsoring H.R. 498, a bill to make permanent recent cap gains and estate tax cuts.
...Mitchell also lauded Dave Graybill and the Pink Heals Tour, an organization dedicated to raising breast cancer awareness.
Press releases (all from House websites)...
...Jeff Flake highlighted his "egregious earmark of the week" here and his bill to deport illegal immigrants convicted of DUI here.
...Trent Franks' (R-CD2) press secretary was prolific this week, producing releases on Franks' vote against H.R. 2, criticizing the New York Times' article blowing the whistle on some U.S. efforts against Iran and Israeli requests for specialized weapons to use against Iran, and commemorating the fourth anniversary of a peace agreement in Sudan.
...Raul Grijalva (D-CD7) expressed his support of the SCHIP renewal bill.
...Ann Kirkpatrick (D-CD1) may have had some press releases this week, but as a freshman Member of Congress, her House website is going to suck until spring. Possibly late spring.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Arizona's week in Congress
This past Tuesday, the 111th session of the United States Congress began with much of the normal procedural routine that occurs at the beginning of every session. Additionally, there were a few measures that passed that were definite slaps at the outgoing Bush administration.
And all in all, the votes of the AZ delegation broke along strictly partisan lines.
On Tuesday, the House convened and the first order of business was selection of the Speaker. As expected, incumbent Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) easily defeated Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH), 255 - 174. (AZ: Democrats Giffords, Grijalva, Kirkpatrick, Mitchell, and Pastor voted for Pelosi; Republicans Flake, Franks, and Shadegg voted for Boehner) After that, the House debated and approved H. Res. 5, its rules for the new session by a vote of 242 - 181 (with Ed Pastor, of all people, crossing over to vote with the Republicans. Otherwise, the AZ delegation followed party lines - Democrats for, Republicans against.
On Wednesday, the House approved two "open government" measures related to Presidental records and Presidential libraries.
H.R. 35, an act that would override a Bush administration executive order that basically allowed former Presidents or their family members to stop the release of any Presidential records that they saw fit. It passed 359 - 58, with all of AZ's Democrats supporting the measure and all of AZ's Republicans opposing it.
H.R. 36, an act to require disclosure of info about contributors to Presidential library organizations. It passed 388 - 31, again with all of the Democrats in the AZ delegation supporting it and all of the Republicans opposing it.
On Thursday, there was a joint session of Congress with no votes cast, but it may have been the most important meeting of the session - it accepted the results of the Electoral College balloting that officially means that Barack Obama will be the next President of the United States.
Whoooo hoooo!!!
:)
Anyway, back to the boring stuff...
On Friday, the House started on actual legislative business.
It considered and passed H.R. 12, the Paycheck Fairness Act by a vote of 256 - 163. Giffords, Grijalva, Kirkpatrick, Mitchell, and Pastor voted in favor; Flake and Franks against; Shadegg not voting.
It also considered and passed H.R. 11, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, by a vote of 247 - 171. As with H.R. 12, Giffords, Grijalva, Kirkpatrick, Mitchell, and Pastor voted in favor; Flake and Franks against; Shadegg not voting.
Congressman Grijalva gave a floor speech on H.R. 11, available here.
Lastly, the House considered and passed H. Res. 34, a resolution "recognizing Israel's right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza, reaffirming the United States' strong support for Israel, and supporting the Israeli-Palestinian peace process." The resolution passed 390 - 5, with 22 answering 'present'. Among AZ's delegation, Flake, Franks, Giffords, Kirkpatrick, Mitchell, and Pastor voted in support, Grijalva was 'present', and Shadegg was still absent. Flake, Giffords, Kirkpatrick, Mitchell, and Shadegg are all cosponsors of H. Res. 34.
Congressman Mitchell submitted a statement for the record (called "Extensions of Remarks) on H. Res. 34, available here.
Congressman Franks gave a special order speech on the subject, available here.
Ummm...Harry Mitchell's statement was brief, positive, and reasonable (in a word: "statesman-like"); Trent Franks' was, well...not. In fact, it seemed to be as much 'anti-Muslim' as it was 'pro-Israel.'
In other Mitchell news, he sponsored H.R. 156, a bill to block Congress' automatic pay increase and submitted a statement regarding it to the Congressional Record, available here. The text of the measure isn't available online yet, though the list of cosponsors is: Flake, Giffords, and Kirkpatrick from Arizona are among those cosponsors.
In light of the cratering economy and skyrocketing unemployment, most people from across the political spectrum think that this is a brilliant idea, and that Congress should make at least a symbolic statement of standing with and supporting those Americans who are suffering from the effects of the economy. What remains to be seen is if a majority of Congress feels the same way.
Don't bet on it.
The Senate was fairly quiet - it had no recorded votes.
The House reconvenes on Tuesday at 12:30 p.m. (D.C. time)
Later...
And all in all, the votes of the AZ delegation broke along strictly partisan lines.
On Tuesday, the House convened and the first order of business was selection of the Speaker. As expected, incumbent Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) easily defeated Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH), 255 - 174. (AZ: Democrats Giffords, Grijalva, Kirkpatrick, Mitchell, and Pastor voted for Pelosi; Republicans Flake, Franks, and Shadegg voted for Boehner) After that, the House debated and approved H. Res. 5, its rules for the new session by a vote of 242 - 181 (with Ed Pastor, of all people, crossing over to vote with the Republicans. Otherwise, the AZ delegation followed party lines - Democrats for, Republicans against.
On Wednesday, the House approved two "open government" measures related to Presidental records and Presidential libraries.
H.R. 35, an act that would override a Bush administration executive order that basically allowed former Presidents or their family members to stop the release of any Presidential records that they saw fit. It passed 359 - 58, with all of AZ's Democrats supporting the measure and all of AZ's Republicans opposing it.
H.R. 36, an act to require disclosure of info about contributors to Presidential library organizations. It passed 388 - 31, again with all of the Democrats in the AZ delegation supporting it and all of the Republicans opposing it.
On Thursday, there was a joint session of Congress with no votes cast, but it may have been the most important meeting of the session - it accepted the results of the Electoral College balloting that officially means that Barack Obama will be the next President of the United States.
Whoooo hoooo!!!
:)
Anyway, back to the boring stuff...
On Friday, the House started on actual legislative business.
It considered and passed H.R. 12, the Paycheck Fairness Act by a vote of 256 - 163. Giffords, Grijalva, Kirkpatrick, Mitchell, and Pastor voted in favor; Flake and Franks against; Shadegg not voting.
It also considered and passed H.R. 11, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, by a vote of 247 - 171. As with H.R. 12, Giffords, Grijalva, Kirkpatrick, Mitchell, and Pastor voted in favor; Flake and Franks against; Shadegg not voting.
Congressman Grijalva gave a floor speech on H.R. 11, available here.
Lastly, the House considered and passed H. Res. 34, a resolution "recognizing Israel's right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza, reaffirming the United States' strong support for Israel, and supporting the Israeli-Palestinian peace process." The resolution passed 390 - 5, with 22 answering 'present'. Among AZ's delegation, Flake, Franks, Giffords, Kirkpatrick, Mitchell, and Pastor voted in support, Grijalva was 'present', and Shadegg was still absent. Flake, Giffords, Kirkpatrick, Mitchell, and Shadegg are all cosponsors of H. Res. 34.
Congressman Mitchell submitted a statement for the record (called "Extensions of Remarks) on H. Res. 34, available here.
Congressman Franks gave a special order speech on the subject, available here.
Ummm...Harry Mitchell's statement was brief, positive, and reasonable (in a word: "statesman-like"); Trent Franks' was, well...not. In fact, it seemed to be as much 'anti-Muslim' as it was 'pro-Israel.'
In other Mitchell news, he sponsored H.R. 156, a bill to block Congress' automatic pay increase and submitted a statement regarding it to the Congressional Record, available here. The text of the measure isn't available online yet, though the list of cosponsors is: Flake, Giffords, and Kirkpatrick from Arizona are among those cosponsors.
In light of the cratering economy and skyrocketing unemployment, most people from across the political spectrum think that this is a brilliant idea, and that Congress should make at least a symbolic statement of standing with and supporting those Americans who are suffering from the effects of the economy. What remains to be seen is if a majority of Congress feels the same way.
Don't bet on it.
The Senate was fairly quiet - it had no recorded votes.
The House reconvenes on Tuesday at 12:30 p.m. (D.C. time)
Later...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)