Thank you, Governor Napolitano

Early today, in a display of fiscal sanity unseen at the legislature, Governor Janet Napolitano vetoed HB2220, the bill to permanently repeal the state equalization tax, a dedicated source of revenue for education. Such a repeal would have eliminated $250 million in education funding.

From her veto letter -

Permanently repealing a tax that supports such basic needs as schools and education during a time of severe bdgetary deficits would be the height of fiscal irresponsibility.

Now if only she could write a letter to force the legislative leadership of Jim Weiers, Tim Bee, and the other Republicans to stop their ideological posturing and actually address the state's budget deficit.

Alas, she is only an elected official, not a miracle worker.

Miracles? For those to happen, voters will have to elect legislators who are more interested in representing their constituents than they are in representing special interests and party-line ideology.


AZ Republic coverage of the veto here.

Contact info for Scottsdale candidates

Per a request from a comment Joe left on my previous post about tonight's Scottsdale candidate forums, here is the contact number for each campaign from their organizational paperwork filed with the city (Joe did ask for the info for the 'good' candidates, but this is Scottsdale after all - to many voters, 'good' seems to mean 'least bad.' If a candidate changed his/her name to "None Of The Above", they'd win in a landslide :) ) -

Council Candidates

Lisa Borowsky - 480.991.3656

Joel Bramoweth - 480.946.6949

Betty Drake - 480.998.1305

Suzanne Klapp - 480.767.9660

Ron McCullagh - 480.990.9200

Richard Mueller - 480.280.1357

Nan Nesvig - 480.368.8701

Note - I've tried to contact Mr. Mueller in the past, as has an EV Trib reporter. There was no response.


Candidates for Mayor

Jim Lane - 480.483.0819

Mary Manross - 480.948.9120

John Washington - 480.229.1831.


I've linked to a candidate's website when I could locate one; the fact that I've done so is not an indication of an endorsement. If any candidate or supporter has a link to a campaign website, email the link to me at cpmaz[at]yahoo.com, and I'll be happy to add the link.

Later!

Scottsdale Candidate Forums on Wednesday

I won't be able to attend either event due to a prior commitment (City Government 101 class), but each event should be interesting and informative.

Both events will be held on Wednesday, April 16.

Info courtesy an email from COGS.

The forums:

MAYORAL CANDIDATES: Villa Monterey Unit III clubhouse 7702 East Highland Avenue begins sharply at 6:30 PM. Bring a lawn chair. Candidates: Mary Manross, Jim Lane, and John Washington

COUNCIL CANDIDATES: Scottsdale Community Council hosts at the Granite Reef Senior Center beginning at 7 PM. Candidates: Betty Drake, Ron McCullagh and Suzanne Klapp.


I'll do a more complete events post later today...

Have a good night!

Quarterly FEC Reports Are Pouring In...

They're not all into the FEC yet, so I'll update over the next few days.

The quarterly numbers so far -

CD1 (open seat)

Shanker (D) (challenger) - Total raised $33,688.73; $31,354.75 from individuals; $0 from PACs; $34,320.21 cash on hand. Note: Shanker's committee has $9,367.88 in outstanding debt (credit card statement).

Hay (R) (challenger) - Total raised $98,618.19; $88,118.19 from individuals; $10,500.00 from PACs; $222,334.01 cash on hand. Note: Hay's committee has $70K in outstanding debt (loans by the candidate).

Kirkpatrick (D) (challenger) - Total raised $257,400.17; $194,650.17 from individuals; $62,250.00 from PACs; $465,464.68 cash on hand. Note: Kirkpatrick's committee has $20K in outstanding debt (loan).

Riley (D) (challenger) - Total raised $15,825.00; $15,825.00 from individuals; $0 from PACs; $216,165.31 cash on hand. Note: Riley's committee has $205K in outstanding debt (candidate loan). Note2: According to PolitickerAZ, Riley has dropped out of the race.

Titla (D) (challenger) - Total raised $39,114.05; $39,114.05 from individuals; $0 from PACs; $48,321.07 cash on hand.

Korn (R) (challenger) - Total raised $14,567.00; $12,266.00 from individuals; $0 from PACs; $10,494.16 cash on hand. Note: Korn's committee has $3,185.36 in outstanding debt (candidate loan and credit card).

Renzi (R) (outgoing incumbent) - $0 raised; $3966.46 cash on hand; $456,073.37 in outstanding debt (legal fees, candidate loans).

CD1 note: According to Tedski at Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion, rumored Republican candidate Ken Bennett has chosen (again!) to pass on the CD1 race.


CD2

Franks (R) (incumbent) - $88,386.00 total raised; $53,261.00 from individuals; $35,625.00 from PACs; 129,774.83 cash on hand. Note: Franks' committee owes $304,100 in outstanding debt (candidate loan).

Thrasher (D) (challenger) - Total raised $3,023.50; $3,023.50 from individuals; $0 from PACs; $12,512.49 cash on hand.


CD3

Lord (D) (challenger) - Total raised $220,166.47; $163,116.47 from individuals; $51,550.00 from PACs; $632,485.41 cash on hand.

Shadegg (R) (incumbent) - Total raised $150,716.41; $163,516.41 from individuals; $47,000.00 from PACs; $937,672.59 cash on hand. Note: The reason that the total raised is less than the combined totals of individual and PAC contributions is that Shadegg's committee refunded nearly $60K in contributions.

Annie Loyd (I) (challenger) - Quarterly report not posted yet.

Shadegg's flirtation with retirement may have cost him some contributions - Shadegg outraised the incumbent, even when ignoring the refunds (which included a refund of $10K in illegal contributions from his own PAC.)

From a Lord press release -

“We could not have come this far or raised this much without the support of the over 1,000 Democrats, Independents, and Republicans who have contributed to my campaign,” Lord said. “I’d like to thank everyone for their continued support. We will change Washington – together.”

CD4

Pastor (D) (incumbent) - Total raised $260,827.71; $164,020.98 from individuals; $96,306.73 from PACs; $1,266,599.90 cash on hand.


CD5

Mitchell (D) (incumbent) - Total raised $321,160.18; $209,028.59 from individuals; $112,110.00 from PACs; $1,121,680.84 cash on hand.

Schweikert (R) (challenger) - Total raised $175,210.23; $171,941.95 from individuals; $2,500.00 from PACs; $514,092.21 cash on hand. Note: Schweikert's committee has $250K in outstanding debt (candidate loan).

Ogsbury (R) (challenger) - Total raised 40,421.17; $37,921.17 from individuals; $2,500.00 from PACs; $353,094.41 cash on hand. Note: Ogsbury's committee has $250K in outstanding debt (candidate loan).

Hatch-Miller (R) (committee terminated) - Owes $17K; cash on hand $245.20.

Knaperek (R) (challenger) - $49,618.00 total raised; $49,518.00 from individuals; $100 from PACs; $44,471.84 cash on hand.

Anderson (R) (challenger) - $55,115.00 total raised; $55,115.00 from individuals; $0 from PACs; $69,985.52 cash on hand.

CD5 Notes: Susan Bitter Smith (R) is still 'exploring', but given the facts that the signature deadline is fast approaching (early June) and that her name is dirt with many of Scottsdale's grassroots Republicans (see: Hanover Project, The), my guess is that she isn't going to jump into the race.

Oh yeah - that Schweikert guy has the money race locked up, if not the balloting race. I don't know what the polling numbers among CD5 Republicans looks like, but Schweikert looks like the frontrunner based on contributions from individuals.

Oh yeah2 - Mitchell has more cash on hand that all of his Republican challengers combined. Mitchell still faces a Republican registration advantage in his district, but he is well-positioned to face whichever Rep makes it out of the primary.


CD6

Flake (R) (incumbent) - Total raised $58,342.00; $52,742.00 from individuals; $6,000.00 from PACs; $974,536.74 cash on hand.


CD7

Grijalva (D) (incumbent) - Total raised $91,312.93; $54,296 from individuals; $37,010.00 from PACs; $139,670.64 cash on hand.


CD8

Giffords (D) (incumbent) - Total raised $466,786.20; $333,616.20 from individuals; $138,070.00 from PACs; $1,672,821.88 cash on hand.

Bee (R) (challenger) - Total raised $466,092.60; $406,992.60 from individuals; $40,000 from PACs; $525,439.88 cash on hand.

The Rep's columnists show their colors

The AZ chapter of the right-wing blogosphere loves to claim that the Arizona Republic is a 'liberal' newspaper. They're wrong.


It's not a 'conservative' paper, either.

It's a 'corporate' paper. They support profits, and the highest profits always seem to be available with the social and political status quo.

Don't believe that? Google their endorsements in the 2006 general elections - the only significant non-incumbent endorsements were Tammie Pursley over Russell Pearce in the LD18 AZ House race and Harry Mitchell over JD Hayworth in the CD5 U.S. House race.

Those two (Pearce and Hayworth) were/are too extreme for even the Rep to endorse. Something of an accomplishment that ('too extreme') - the Rep is so status quo-oriented that they even endorsed the wholly corrupt incumbent Rick Renzi in the CD1 U.S. House race that year.

Overall, while these days the news sections are pretty much puff pieces, press releases, or, in the case of most non-Phoenix based community stories, wire service reports, such as those codged from the East Valley Tribune, the editorial page *is* predominantly conservative (with an eye toward keeping advertisers happy).

That's OK; the editorial pages are intended to express opinions, even (or especially) opinions that generate disagreement and discussion.




On Sunday, two of the Rep's columnists showed their true conservative colors. That fact alone wouldn't normally rate a post, but the fact that they did such a poor job of it does.



In Doug MacEachern's case it wasn't much of a surprise - readers can always count on him to be anti-Democrat, anti-worker, anti-public education, anti-etc.



In Sunday's column he went a little farther out on the fringe than he normally does.



In a column supporting the Colombia Free Trade Agreement and lamenting Congress' delay in approving it [let's face it - it is *only* a delay; the agreement will be approved...the only question is whether it will be approved before or after the November elections], MacEachern used most of his column to blame unions for economic protectionism in particular and for all that ails the American economy in general.



From the column -

...but the fact is unions never have been especially keen on the subject of free trade, a facet of their job-protectionism mentality that may have done more to bring about their private-industry demise than anything else.

This graph from MSN Encarta on rate of union membership illustrates how well labor unions can influence public policy these days -












If that isn't enough to give lie to MacEachern's position about how union influence is hurting America's economy, this Harris poll from 1994 regarding people's opinion of unions after the passage of NAFTA should get the job done.

Perhaps more accurately, he should say the *waning* of union influence has hurt the American economy; it's certainly hurt the American worker.


MacEachern's canard about unions was annoying, but not too surprising. It's a rather well-used one in the right-wing echo chamber

Sunday's column from his editorial page-mate Robert Robb *was* a major surprise.

Don't misunderstand - he is normally a totally pro-corporation, laissez-faire libertarian sort of writer, and Sunday's column was no different in that regard.

He is also normally a very good writer - clear and logical in the structuring of his arguments, and temperate in his choice of language.

He's always readable, just usually wrong. :))

On Sunday, though, he dropped this whopper in a column about the comparative merits of the lege's plan to repeal the equalization property tax (cutting a source of revenue dedicated to education funding to the tune of a quarter billion dollars) versus a $1.4 billion university construction program -

...[The idea behind spending on public education and infrastructure is that] College graduates make more money than non-graduates, so the state's economy will be larger.

College graduates, however, are mobile, so the economic benefits of their higher productivity don't necessary accrue to the state that subsidized their education.

Yup, he just argued against spending money on public universities because educated people might leave Arizona.

I'm not sure which he has a lower opinion of -

Arizona, or the people who call it home.

Either way, it's rather ironic that he is one of the lead opinion columnists for a newspaper named the Arizona Republic.


And the cons of AZ used to complain about Jon Talton badmouthing Phoenix...wonder if they have anything to say about Robb's insult?

Russell Pearce - the gift that keeps on giving

Edit on 4/17 to update the committee's actions, at the end of the original post...

Here I was, all set to write a post on the inanity of a couple of the AZ Republic's columnists (not unusual) and another on the Obama/'bitter' dustup (overblown), but those can wait - State Rep. Russell Pearce (R-National Alliance) is at it again.

Last week, he was cutting arts funding; this week, he's micromanaging public education.

He has introduced another 'strike-everything' amendment to a bill to be heard in his own committee, House Appropriations. The hearing is scheduled for Wednesday afternoon.

As noted in this post from last week, he introduced an anti-arts education funding amendment to SB1192. Joining it on Wednesday's Appropriations agenda is an amendment to SB1108.

This new amendment would, among other things -

- - bar a public school from offering "any courses, classes or school sponsored activities that promote, assert as truth or feature as an exclusive focus any political, religious, ideological or cultural beliefs or values that denigrate, disparage or overtly encourage dissent from the values of American democracy and western civilization, including democracy, capitalism, pluralism and religious toleration."

- - give the Superintendent of Public Instruction the authority to review a school's curricula and course materials and to withhold state funds if he finds that there are any violations.

- - bar public schools, community colleges and universities from allowing "organizations to operate on the campus of the school, university or community college if the organization is based in whole or in part on race-based criteria."


Something tells me that he's not targeting campus chapters of the KKK, the College Republicans, or similar organizations with that last. :)


Anyway, perhaps one of Rep. Pearce's colleagues should let him know that one of the character traits of most Americans is that we do NOT like being told how to think -

His attempt to stifle dissent may actually *encourage* it far more than any class that discusses a system that is something other than "American democracy and western civilization" ever could.

Edit on 4/17 -

As expected, the Appropriations Committee passed Pearce's amendment to SB1108 to restrict public school curricula and extracurricular activities.

From the AZ Republic -

Arizona public schools would be barred from any teachings considered counter to democracy or Western civilization under a proposal endorsed Wednesday by a legislative panel.

Additionally, the measure would prohibit students of the state's universities and community colleges from forming groups based in whole or part on the race of their members, such as the Black Business Students Association at Arizona State University or Native Americans United at Northern Arizona University. Those groups would be forbidden from operating on campus.

The brainchild of Rep. Russell Pearce, the measure appeared as an amendment to Senate Bill 1108, which originally would have made minor changes to the state's Homeland Security advisory councils. The House Appropriations Committee approved the new proposal on a 9-6 vote.

It may be too late in the session for this to be more than a little showboating by Pearce - the amended bill still has to be passed by the full House, returned to the Senate, heard in committee there, and passed by the full Senate...and if all of that happens, it would still face the Governor.

I won't say that all of that can't happen, but it's unlikely.

On the other hand, enactment of the measure may never have been Pearce's intent (though he certainly wouldn't object to it!) -

For a day or two, people will be distracted from the fact that Pearce's committee still hasn't done its work on dealing with the state's budget deficit.

End edit...

Short Attention Span Musing - Congressional Edition

...In the "big" news this week, Arizona Corporation Commissioner Kris Mayes announced that she would not run for the Republican nomination in CD1 (PolitickerAZ).

This may actually help not the other Republicans running, but instead it may aid the Democrats' chances of taking Renzi's seat. While Mayes may be too moderate and too conscientious a public servant to suit the power structure of the Arizona Republican Party, it's precisely those qualities that would have made her a formidable candidate in a general election.

As for the other major Rep candidates, Sydney "my soul is owned by the mining industry" Hay (already in the race) and Ken "broomstick" Bennett (rumored to be entering the race)?? Not so much.

Follow the links - each one has major weaknesses as a candidate, weaknesses that the eventual Democratic nominee will be certain to bring to the attention of CD1's voters.


...Over in CD5, while the Republican challengers to Harry Mitchell were making nice with each other, in an "aww shucks, isn't that cute" sort of way (and taking shots at Democrats in general and Mitchell in particular) on Monday, Mitchell was sponsoring a 21st century version of the GI Bill (H.R. 5740).

No AZ Republicans in Congress signed on as cosponsors of the bill to support post-9/11 veterans.
No Republican challenger in CD5 has issued a statement that they support H.R. 5740 either, and a quick perusal of their campaign websites finds far more support for the war in Iraq than for the servicemen and women fighting and dying in the war.


...In CD3, Republican John Shadegg had a mixed week -

First, he found out that the U.S. Chamber of Congress loves him (no word though on what Paradise Valley thinks of him or if he understands that PV is part of his district, and the US CofC isn't) and he loved them right back - attacking Congressional Democrats for delaying a vote on the Colombia Free Trade deal.

Later in the week, however, his constituents found out that alleged "taxpayer watchdog" Shadegg (as well as CD6's Jeff Flake) has no problem with taking international trips at taxpayer expense.

Then there was the whole "Shadegg was recorded by the FBI on a Renzi wiretap" news, too. :)

Oh, and challenger Bob Lord raised more than $220K during the first quarter and has more than $630K on hand.

All in all, *not* a good week for Congressman Shadegg.


...Of course, while Shadegg's week fell into the "not good" category, the week of Tim Bee, Republican challenger to Gabrielle Giffords in CD8 had an "absolutely lousy" week.

Tedski at Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion broke the story of a taxpayer-funded campaign...errr...'thank-you' ad for Bee. In his update on the original post, Tedski found that the source of the funding for the TV spot was a bunch of school districts and that the ad aired not in his legislative district, but in CD8. Hmmm...

Now that the DCCC has filed a complaint over the spot, Bee may learn the hard way that he's trying to step up to the big leagues.

Part of that lesson will be understanding that the FEC is going to hammer him for stuff that AZ's Secretary of State Jan Brewer would turn a blind eye to (at least for fellow Republicans, anyway.)


Later!

Arts Funding, Professional Responsibility, Mexicans - Is There Anything That The Reps *Do* Like?

Update time...

In a previous post, I mentioned a bill that Russell Pearce (R-National Alliance) planned to hijack with a strike-everything amendment. That amendment would have immunized Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and any other government attorney from professional sanctions for misdeeds committed during the performance of "official duties."

That bill, SB1192, was scheduled to be heard and amended during this past Wednesday's meeting of the House Appropriations Committee. However, it wasn't heard (only ELL funding was) and was apparently dead.

However, a brief check of the agenda for next week's meeting of House Appropriations shows that SB1192 is back up for consideration and will again be subject to a strike-everything amendment.

This time, however, according to the agenda, the amendment will have to do with "abandoned mines safety funding."

A bill addressing abandoned mine safety funding, SB1330, didn't make it out of the Senate. Part of the reason that it didn't make it out of the Senate was the fact that the bill would have funded closure of abandoned mines by stripping all of the money for an arts education program. (EV Trib coverage here)

I checked the lege's page listing all strike everything amendments and couldn't find anything listing that such an amendment has been filed as yet.

Assuming such an amendment is filed, it will be interesting to see if arts funding is targeted again, or if one of the Republicans' other favorite targets for such attacks, such as AHCCCS, will find itself in the crosshairs.

According to the House Clerk's office, House rules governing strike-everything amendments only require that a proposed amendment be submitted by 4:00 p.m. on the 2nd day prior to its consideration. As such under that rule, the text of the amendment may not be available until late Monday afternoon.

[Note - I contacted both the Arizona Commission for the Arts and Arizona Citizens and Action for the Arts. Neither organization had heard about the proposed striker, but were *very* interested and are looking into the matter. Stay tuned.]

More later!

Russell Pearce (R-National Alliance) coming through for his friends...

Edit on 4/10 to update, at the end of the post...

...and proves that his win in the race for this year's Legislative Loon Award was well-deserved.

Thanks to The New Times' Sarah Fenske (writing the column 'Valley Fever') for the heads-up on this one...

Earlier this week, Pearce submitted a "strike everything" amendment to SB1192, a bill that originally related to perjury.

The language of the amendment -

SECTION 29. No public officer or employee of a public agency who is licensed to practice law in this state is subject to any inquiry, investigation or disciplinary action by the supreme court or any entity of the supreme court for any act that is done in an official capacity and in good faith and that is based on constitutional or statutory authority.

The end result of the language would be to ensure that Andrew Thomas (and his hatchet-man, Dennis Wilenchik) face absolutely no professional sanctions for any of their actions, no matter how out of line those actions might be (as in investigating and arresting journalists for writing uncomplimentary articles about Thomas and Joe Arpaio).

At first glance, this sort of legislation would seem out of character for Mr. "Operation Wetback" who normally targets his looniest legislation toward Mexican immigrants, but this makes perfect sense when you consider the fact that Thomas' support lends an apparent air of respectability to the immigrant-bashing and -harassing efforts of Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Pearce.

So Pearce's ploy to protect Thomas, while repulsive in an 'ethical' way, makes perfect sense in a 'practical politics' way.

If the bill passes both the House and the Senate, the measure would then go to the ballot in the fall, bypassing the Governor's veto pen.

The bill was scheduled for a hearing in the House Appropriations Committee on Wednesday where Pearce would attempt to amend it. I don't know if it passed (the results haven't been posted on the Lege's website, and I couldn't find any MSM stories about the hearing), but since Pearce is the committee's chairman, I feel safe in guessing that it did pass on a party line vote.

Updates when available...

Update on 4/10 - Turns out my assumption was wrong - Pearce's strike-everything amendment did *not* pass on a party line vote.

It wasn't heard at all.

I called Pearce's office (after being referred to him by the House Clerk's office) to ask about the striker's prospects.

I was informed that the bill and the striker will not be heard because (to paraphrase) "the court will take care of the problem itself."

That's no guarantee that the bill and striker will *not* be heard, but as we are now in mid-April, every day that a bill isn't moving makes it more likely that it is dead for the session.

End edit...

Later!

Renzi creating problems for his colleagues

From The Hill -

FBI wiretaps picked up the voices of several members of Congress in their conversations with Rep. Rick Renzi (R-Ariz.).

The House General Counsel’s office recently notified those members after the Department of Justice (DOJ) told the House lawyers that the lawmakers’ voices had been intercepted during the FBI’s investigation of Renzi’s land deal, according to three GOP sources.

The article did not identify any of members of Congress that were recorded during the FBI's surveillance of Renzi.


Hmmm...it seems that soon, I won't be able to refer to Renzi as "(R-Mantech)."

Nope, soon he will be Rick Renzi (R-Pariah).

Of course, if there is any justice in the world, his "R-Pariah" designation won't last long.

After his trial (and conviction!), he'll become "Rick Renzi (R-FCI Safford).

Time to write to the Governor

On Tuesday, the Arizona State Senate, by a 16 -13 vote, gave final approval to HB2220, the state equalization property tax repeal. (AZ Rep article here)

The bill, if now signed into law by Governor Napolitano, would repeal a dedicated source of funding for education (dedicated to the tune of $250 million). The tax has been temporarily suspended as part of a deal reached in 2006 while the state's treasury was full, and the state could afford to fully fund education via funds from other sources.

Now, the deal to suspend the tax is expiring and the state is facing a huge, $3 billion, deficit.

The Republican caucus in the senate, with the notable exceptions of Sens. Carolyn Allen (R-Scottsdale) and Tom O'Halleran (R-Sedona), voted to place their radical right anti-education ideology above the needs of the state's financial stability and its future. The Republicans were aided by Democratic Senator Ken Cheuvront (D-Phoenix), who gave them the 16th vote that they needed to actually pass the bill.

As noted in the Rep article, the state's business community is mounting a campaign to pressure the Governor to ignore the state's fiscal crisis and sign the bill into law.

Right now, she is only hearing the voices of those concerned with short-term profits or with foisting an extremeist ideology on the rest of society.

Instead, she needs to hear the voices of teachers, students, parents, and anyone who views Arizona as a 'home' to be built, protected, and treasured, not just a 'profit center' to be milked and discarded.

The contact page of the Governor's website is here; keep your message short, polite, and clear -

Veto HB2220.

Warde Nichols: trying to ban the Bible??

It's actually a little disappointing that the Arizona State Senate's Judiciary Committee killed Rep. Warde Nichols' (R-Home of the Devil Dogs) scheme to revoke the First Amendment (HB2660).

His bill would have cleared the way for lawsuits against people who create or sell dangerous and/or obscene material that inspires someone to commit a crime.

As much as I respect, even revere, the principles of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, I really would have loved to see the squirming of Nichols and the right-wing caucus of the lege when they realized that a certain 'inspirational' book would have been subject to the provisions of its proposed law, with its tales of, among other things, murder (1), genocide (2), rape (3), revenge (4), child molesting (5), biological terrorism (6), and domestic violence (7).

So what is this handbook of perversion, violence, fear and hatred?

{cue up Jeopardy music} :))

...Yup, you guessed it, the book in question is the Bible.

There's some pretty nasty stuff going on there (especially in the Old Testament!), stuff that according to today's community standards is totally unacceptable, even to right-wingers.

And to those who say that the Bible is a "good" book and only inspires "good" acts, let me point out murdered children, assassinated doctors, raped women, molested children (too many to list), an entire Inquisition, etc.

In short, the Bible has material "would substantially assist, encourage or result in another person committing terrorism or a felony offense" (to quote Nichols' bill) and has, in fact, been cited as an inspiration for some of the most heinous crimes in history.

So, under the terms of Nichols' bill, anybody who prints or sells a Bible would be civilly liable for damages for crimes inspired by one or more passages in the Bible.


After the Judiciary Committee vote, Nichols promised to return next year with a new, narrower, bill. Ignoring for the moment that Phil Hettmansperger may have something to say about Nichols' return next year, perhaps Rep. Nichols should take the vote as a sign from God (so to speak) - the Committee protected him from the ire of his base, the radical right among the Republicans in Gilbert.


Thanks to the Skeptics Annotated Bible for the citations and the University of Virginia for the online Bible text -

(1) Genesis 19:24
(2) Genesis 6:7
(3) Genesis 34:2
(4) the rest of Genesis 34
(5) Genesis 19:8
(6) Exodus 9:9
(7) Hosea 2:3

Later!

P.S. - the alternate title for this post was "Warde Nichols: Master of Unintended Consequences" :))

Candidate Update - Scottsdale Mayor

It looks like there are now three candidates for mayor of Scottsdale -

Incumbent Mary Manross (city bio page here, campaign website here)

Jim Lane, current member of the City Council (city bio page here, couldn't find a campaign website)

And the rumored third entrant - John Washington of the Coalition of Greater Scottsdale (COGS). This story was broken by The Scottsdale Activist; at Tuesday's meeting of the City Council, I heard that Mr. Washington had taken out papers for the race, but hadn't been able to confirm the info.

Very early, and brief analysis -

If Washington actually enters the race, it would seem to hurt Lane's candidacy more than Manross'. Previously, one of the strengths of Lane's candidacy was the "Anybody but Manross" vote. However, many of the neighborhood activists consider Lane to be 'Manross-lite*' and could very well switch their allegiances to Washington, who is a neighborhood activist himself.

Manross' core strength is the Scottsdale business community (aka - the Chamber of Commerce and developers); Washington probably won't cut into that area, though Lane could.



* - The Scottsdale Activist uses the same characterization in its story re: Washington, but I didn't plagarize it from them - I (and I expect that one of the writers at Scottsdale Activist :) ) have heard it at more than one COGS meeting.

Later!

Bush Fulfills A Campaign Promise

It's taken close to eight years for George "I'm a uniter, not a divider" Bush to live up to his own promise, but he's finally done - most Americans agree on one thing -

81% think that the country is on the wrong track.

Something tells me that when it comes time to select material for the George W. Bush presidential library and hunting blind, this survey won't make the cut. :))

From the N.Y. Times -

Americans are more dissatisfied with the country’s direction than at any time since the New York Times/CBS News poll began asking about the subject in the early 1990s, according to the latest poll.

In the poll, 81 percent of respondents said they believed “things have pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track,” up from 69 percent a year ago and 35 percent in early 2002.

Harry Mitchell's speech on reauthorization of the U.S.Fire Administration

The 2nd of tonight's copy and paste posts features Congressman Harry Mitchell's speech in support of his bill to reauthorize the U.S. Fire Administration, given on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday, April 3, 2008.

From the page H1979 of Congressional Record -

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 4847, the U.S. Fire Administration Reauthorization Act of 2008, a bill I introduced with the original cosponsor, my good friend from Georgia, Dr. Gingrey. Firefighters are often the first to arrive at an emergency scene and the last to leave. Whether it is putting out a house fire or a wild fire, or responding to a terrorist attack or car accident, we depend on firefighters every day. But firefighters also depend on us; they depend on the public and their elected officials to make sure that they have the resources, the equipment, and the training they need to do their job. Without those tools, we put them and all of us at risk.

The U.S. Fire Administration is an invaluable resource for our Nation's firefighters and the communities they protect. Through training, data collection, fire education for the public, and support for fire-related research and development, the USFA provides critical tools and leadership to the Fire Service.

Fire is one of nature's most destructive forces. In 1973, when USFA was created, over 6,000 Americans died each year in fires and another 100,000 were injured. Through the leadership of USFA and others, the number of people killed by fires each year is now between 3,000 and 3,500, with approximately 16,000 people who were injured. We can all be proud of the significant reduction. However, 3,000 Americans a year is still too many, especially when so many of these deaths and injuries are from our most vulnerable populations, children and the elderly.

In addition, the Nation still suffers over $11 billion per year in direct losses due to fire, and the trend for this number is going up, not down. With statistics like these, it is clear that fire continues to be a major problem for the U.S. H.R. 4847 reauthorizes this important agency for 4 years at funding levels that will enable USFA to carry out fully its mission.

At a hearing with the Technology and Innovation Subcommittee held last fall, we heard the priorities of the Nation's fire service communities for USFA. This bill directly reflects their priorities.

This bill authorizes the USFA to focus on the pressing challenges of fighting fires in the wildland-urban interface, and fires involving hazardous materials, as well as advanced topics of emergency medical services.

Back home in Arizona, one of the toughest challenges our firefighters face is wildfires in the wildland-urban interface. This is an important year for wildfires. We have had a pretty wet winter which means a great deal of shrubs and bushes have grown at lower elevations. When the summer months heat up and the vegetation dries out, those shrubs and bushes will turn into tinder that can start a fast-moving wildfire in urban areas. Those fires threaten homes and lives. Fighting wildfires in urban areas requires special training, and I am proud that this legislation enhances fire administration training for wildland-urban interface fires.

Firefighters today are called upon to respond to an ever-broader range of emergencies. This authorization bill gives USFA the authority to make sure its training program keeps pace with the increasing challenges to the fire service.

The bill also addresses an important priority of the fire service in USFA, and that is to update the National Fire Incident Reporting System, or NFIRS. This system provides important data on fire events to policymakers at all levels of government. The current system is slow to report the data to the National Fire Data Center, and does not capture data on every fire, thus limiting its value to users. H.R. 4847 would direct USFA to update NFIRS to a real-time reporting, web-based system.

The bill also directs the U.S. Fire Administrator to continue USFA's leadership in firefighter health and safety. Every year over 100 firefighters die in the line of duty. H.R. 4847 directs USFA to educate local fire departments about national voluntary consensus standards for firefighter health and safety, and to encourage local departments to adopt these standards. This provision will help reduce the tragic loss of life the fire service suffers each year in line-of-duty deaths by promoting good practices in a variety of fire emergencies.

I also understand there have been some concerns that this provision would affect the jurisdiction of NIOSH, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health. I would like to reassure my colleagues that it is not my intent for this bill to have any effect on NIOSH or any other agency of the Department of Health and Human Services.

H.R. 4847 is the product of bipartisan collaboration, and is supported by major fire service organizations, including the International Association of Fire Chiefs, the International Association of Firefighters, the National Volunteer Fire Council, National Fire Protection Association, and the Congressional Fire Services Institute.

The resources and leadership of the USFA are an essential part of the ability of the fire service to protect our cities, towns and communities. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

No partisan showboating or gamesmanship here, just solid and practical work on a mundane but vital issue, on behalf of his constituents and the country.

Apparently, freshman Congressman Harry Mitchell could teach something to veterans like John "Only has a cold shoulder for his constituents in Paradise Valley when that have poison coming out of their taps" Shadegg..

Later!