From Phoenix's channel 15
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Why don't we build anything anymore?
From AP via Yahoo! News -
Yet those things, like the interstate highway system, transcontinental rail system, the Hoover Dam, Tennessee Valley Authority, and more all created the infrastructure necessary to encourage and sustain the American economy in ways that short-sighted "free market" theorists (who are usually nothing more than corporate lobbyists with an academic degree) will never admit to.
Those lobbyists would rather not have roads to carry their products/services on than have to pay for those roads.
If the "free market" was left entirely to its own devices, there wouldn't be much electricity or water in Arizona, hence there wouldn't be much Arizona.
However, because of federal projects and spending on things like the Central Arizona Project, Arizona is home to millions of people, as opposed to the thousands (not hundreds of thousands, just thousands) that could or would live here without them.
The Party of No, whether the large-scale version in D.C., the smaller version at the AZ lege, or the street corner variety in places like Scottsdale ("no light rail for us!"), is all about protecting the short-term revenue streams of corporations and the already-wealthy.
Years ago (and now, for that matter), the Rs would rationalize their tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations by saying that "a rising tide lifts all boats." The implication was that by helping the wealthy, the wealthy would help everyone else.
It was and is the era of "trickle down" economics. Yes, I know that this is a very simple, even simplistic, explanation, but tinkle down economics isn't the focus of this post.
What the state and the country should understand is that is backward thinking. The country's real need is long-term thinking, and a realization that the rising tide that lifts working fishing trawlers first also eventually lifts luxury passenger liners as the working class starts spending money.
By sacrificing America's future economic viability in order to bolster corporations' immediate bottom lines, the Party of No is crippling America for decades, possibly ever.
NEWARK, N.J. – New Jersey's governor wants to kill a $9 billion-plus train tunnel to New York City because of runaway costs. Six thousand miles away, Hawaii's outgoing governor is having second thoughts about a proposed $5.5 billion rail line in Honolulu.Many public works projects are decried as "pork" or "the government interfering in the free market" by Republicans.
In many of the 48 states in between, infrastructure projects are languishing on the drawing board, awaiting the right mix of creative financing, political arm-twisting and timing to move forward. And a struggling economy and a surge of political candidates opposed to big spending could make it a long wait.
Yet those things, like the interstate highway system, transcontinental rail system, the Hoover Dam, Tennessee Valley Authority, and more all created the infrastructure necessary to encourage and sustain the American economy in ways that short-sighted "free market" theorists (who are usually nothing more than corporate lobbyists with an academic degree) will never admit to.
Those lobbyists would rather not have roads to carry their products/services on than have to pay for those roads.
If the "free market" was left entirely to its own devices, there wouldn't be much electricity or water in Arizona, hence there wouldn't be much Arizona.
However, because of federal projects and spending on things like the Central Arizona Project, Arizona is home to millions of people, as opposed to the thousands (not hundreds of thousands, just thousands) that could or would live here without them.
The Party of No, whether the large-scale version in D.C., the smaller version at the AZ lege, or the street corner variety in places like Scottsdale ("no light rail for us!"), is all about protecting the short-term revenue streams of corporations and the already-wealthy.
Years ago (and now, for that matter), the Rs would rationalize their tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations by saying that "a rising tide lifts all boats." The implication was that by helping the wealthy, the wealthy would help everyone else.
It was and is the era of "trickle down" economics. Yes, I know that this is a very simple, even simplistic, explanation, but tinkle down economics isn't the focus of this post.
What the state and the country should understand is that is backward thinking. The country's real need is long-term thinking, and a realization that the rising tide that lifts working fishing trawlers first also eventually lifts luxury passenger liners as the working class starts spending money.
By sacrificing America's future economic viability in order to bolster corporations' immediate bottom lines, the Party of No is crippling America for decades, possibly ever.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Ben Arredondo honored for his public service
From the East Valley Tribune -
Learn more about Ben, his career, and his campaign for the Arizona House of Representatives here.
The Tempe Sports Complex will be rededicated Monday in the name of former Councilman Ben Arredondo. A ceremony will include Arredondo, U.S. Rep. Harry Mitchell, D-Ariz., and former Mayor Neil Giuliano.Congratulations to Ben!
Arredondo was on Tempe’s Council for 16 years and is a former high school teacher, coach and member of the Tempe Elementary School District governing board. He helped create the annual Tempe Tardeada event and worked on a Tempe History Museum exhibit that features memories of Hispanic community members.
Learn more about Ben, his career, and his campaign for the Arizona House of Representatives here.
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.
Scottsdale City Council bails out Arizona American Water
After more than 2 hours of presentations and discussions at Tuesday's meeting of the Scottsdale City Council, the Council voted 5 - 2 to enter into a "Treat and Transport" agreement with Arizona American Water (AAW) whereby Scottsdale will treat TCE-contaminated water from wells controlled by AAW and then return it ("transport") back to AAW's system for delivery to its customers.
Previous posts on the matter here and here.
I'll keep this brief because I walked out of the meeting thoroughly ticked off at the selling out of Scottsdale residents by the majority on the Council, and that anger will affect the quality of my writing.
The five members who voted to shoulder AAW's cleanup responsibilities were Mayor Jim Lane, Vice-Mayor Suzanne Klapp, Council member Wayne Ecton, Council member Bob Littlefield, and Council member Marg Nelssen.
Littlefield and Ecton are up for reelection this year. Littlefield's support of AAW was no surprise - he's long been a corporate apologist. Ecton's was a bit of a surprise, and he had a seriously sour look on his face when he cast his vote, but he voted in favor of AAW nonetheless.
The two members who supported condemnation of AAW were Council member Ron McCullagh and Council member Lisa Borowsky.
McCullagh's support of condemnation was no surprise - he's a customer of AAW and has been the victim of their screw-ups (and AAW's arrogance about those screw-ups) for years. Borowsky's support of condemnation was weaker and seemed to be rooted in some reservations about the trustworthiness of the AAW figures that she has met with, not in a whole-hearted support for acquiring AAW's Scottsdale operation and folding their customers into the Scottsdale municipal system.
In the interests of keeping this brief, and because the AZ Republic will probably cover the matter in more depth later today, here are some observations from the meeting:
- It was definitely a "strange bedfellows" sort of evening - Lane and Littlefield were on the same side of the issue as the Scottsdale Area Chamber of Commerce. Definitely an unusual event.
- More "strange bedfellows" - former (2008) rivals for the R nod for CD5, Laura Knaperek and Susan Bitter Smith, were there to lobby for AAW. I'm not sure that it means much, but they stayed well away from each other during the meeting.
- They weren't even together during the group hug/backslapping session held outside City Hall by AAW's lobbyists after the hearing.
- Two member of the governing board of the Central Arizona Project were in the Kiva to support AAW, though neither was ID'ed as such. Both Tim Bray, who spoke, and Bitter Smith are current members of the Board. Bray is running for reelection; Bitter Smith is not.
- Before the meeting hypocrisy alert (unrelated to the AAW matter) - at the beginning of the meeting, Jim Lane proudly announced that the City had purchased more land for the McDowell Sonoran Preserve, partially with money from the Growing Smarter/Land Conservation Fund.
A fund that Republicans, including Lane, want to dismantle in favor of corporate tax cuts (Proposition 301).
All in all, it was a very frustrating evening, both for me and for most of the residents in the Kiva. The vast majority of those who weren't there on AAW's dime strongly supported condemnation.
I left the building with one thought - if the issue at hand was a tattoo parlor in north Scottsdale increasing profits by cutting corners on needles, and exposing residents of north Scottsdale to hepatitis, HIV, or something else, the Council would have fallen all over itself to shut down the operation and kick it out of Scottsdale. However, the people exposed to poison as a result of AAW's shoddy maintenance practices (and that was part of the final report of the investigation looking into the incidents that precipitated Tuesday's agenda item) were all in south Scottsdale.
People noticed that, and many of the folks walking out of the Kiva after the meeting left muttering that they would be supporting whoever runs for Mayor against Lane in 2012.
While Tuesday's meeting was a serious setback for supporters of good governance, from any partisan affiliation (I'm a D, yet both McCullagh and Borowsky are active Rs), something tells me this isn't over. Tuesday's vote was for approval of guidance to City staff, not on approval of a specific contract.
Later...
Previous posts on the matter here and here.
I'll keep this brief because I walked out of the meeting thoroughly ticked off at the selling out of Scottsdale residents by the majority on the Council, and that anger will affect the quality of my writing.
The five members who voted to shoulder AAW's cleanup responsibilities were Mayor Jim Lane, Vice-Mayor Suzanne Klapp, Council member Wayne Ecton, Council member Bob Littlefield, and Council member Marg Nelssen.
Littlefield and Ecton are up for reelection this year. Littlefield's support of AAW was no surprise - he's long been a corporate apologist. Ecton's was a bit of a surprise, and he had a seriously sour look on his face when he cast his vote, but he voted in favor of AAW nonetheless.
The two members who supported condemnation of AAW were Council member Ron McCullagh and Council member Lisa Borowsky.
McCullagh's support of condemnation was no surprise - he's a customer of AAW and has been the victim of their screw-ups (and AAW's arrogance about those screw-ups) for years. Borowsky's support of condemnation was weaker and seemed to be rooted in some reservations about the trustworthiness of the AAW figures that she has met with, not in a whole-hearted support for acquiring AAW's Scottsdale operation and folding their customers into the Scottsdale municipal system.
In the interests of keeping this brief, and because the AZ Republic will probably cover the matter in more depth later today, here are some observations from the meeting:
- It was definitely a "strange bedfellows" sort of evening - Lane and Littlefield were on the same side of the issue as the Scottsdale Area Chamber of Commerce. Definitely an unusual event.
- More "strange bedfellows" - former (2008) rivals for the R nod for CD5, Laura Knaperek and Susan Bitter Smith, were there to lobby for AAW. I'm not sure that it means much, but they stayed well away from each other during the meeting.
- They weren't even together during the group hug/backslapping session held outside City Hall by AAW's lobbyists after the hearing.
- Two member of the governing board of the Central Arizona Project were in the Kiva to support AAW, though neither was ID'ed as such. Both Tim Bray, who spoke, and Bitter Smith are current members of the Board. Bray is running for reelection; Bitter Smith is not.
- Before the meeting hypocrisy alert (unrelated to the AAW matter) - at the beginning of the meeting, Jim Lane proudly announced that the City had purchased more land for the McDowell Sonoran Preserve, partially with money from the Growing Smarter/Land Conservation Fund.
A fund that Republicans, including Lane, want to dismantle in favor of corporate tax cuts (Proposition 301).
All in all, it was a very frustrating evening, both for me and for most of the residents in the Kiva. The vast majority of those who weren't there on AAW's dime strongly supported condemnation.
I left the building with one thought - if the issue at hand was a tattoo parlor in north Scottsdale increasing profits by cutting corners on needles, and exposing residents of north Scottsdale to hepatitis, HIV, or something else, the Council would have fallen all over itself to shut down the operation and kick it out of Scottsdale. However, the people exposed to poison as a result of AAW's shoddy maintenance practices (and that was part of the final report of the investigation looking into the incidents that precipitated Tuesday's agenda item) were all in south Scottsdale.
People noticed that, and many of the folks walking out of the Kiva after the meeting left muttering that they would be supporting whoever runs for Mayor against Lane in 2012.
While Tuesday's meeting was a serious setback for supporters of good governance, from any partisan affiliation (I'm a D, yet both McCullagh and Borowsky are active Rs), something tells me this isn't over. Tuesday's vote was for approval of guidance to City staff, not on approval of a specific contract.
Later...
2012 starts now - Redistricting Commission applicants being reviewed
I can hear the groans of "What? 2010 isn't even over yet!" already...
The list of applicants for the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission is available. The Commission on Appellate Court Appointments will screen the applicants, nominating 25 out of the 79. Out of those 25, five will actually be appointed - 2 Ds, 2 Rs, and 1 Independent.
The press release in its entirety -
The Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission's website is here.
The Arizona Judicial Nominating Commissions' website is here. (The Commission on Appellate Court Appointments is one of the JNCs.)
The list of applicants for the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission is available. The Commission on Appellate Court Appointments will screen the applicants, nominating 25 out of the 79. Out of those 25, five will actually be appointed - 2 Ds, 2 Rs, and 1 Independent.
The press release in its entirety -
STATE SEEKS COMMENT ON APPLICANTS FOR ARIZONA REDISTRICTING COMMISSION
The public is being asked for comments on 79 applicants for Arizona’s Independent Redistricting Commission, which will oversee the mapping of Arizona’s congressional and legislative districts in 2011.
The Arizona constitution directs the Commission on Appellate Court Appointments to review the applications and by January 8 to nominate 25 people to serve. Four elected officials will appoint the first four members of the Redistricting Commission. The fifth member will be chosen by the four members appointed to the commission.
No more than two members of the Redistricting Commission can be members of the same political party. Of the first four appointed, no more than two can be residents of the same county. Among the applicants there are 31 Republicans, 31 Democrats, and 17 Independents. Applications were received from 11 of Arizona’s 15 counties.
An alphabetical list of all applicants follows. Lists are also available by political affiliation or county by calling (602) 452-3311 or at the nomination website, http://www.arizonaredistricting-nominations.com/.
The applications will be reviewed at a public meeting on November 16. The meeting will be held at the Arizona State Courts Building in Phoenix, 1501 W. Washington, Conf. Rm. 345, beginning at 10:00 a.m. Citizens may address the Appellate Commission at that time or send written comments to 1501 W. Washington, Suite 221, Phoenix, AZ 85007. Written comments must be received by November 10 to be considered.
The Appellate Commission may vote on nominations for the Redistricting Commission at the November 16 meeting or at a later meeting.
APPLICANTS FOR REDISTRICTING COMMISSION
Allmon, Kathleen Patricia
Ashton, MarcThe applications can be viewed here.
Bates, Gary
Bender, Paul
Bladine, Raymond Frank
Broderson, Gerald C.
Broome, Beth Frances
Bruner, Jim
Busching, Marcia J.
Cafarelli, Eugene Joseph
Campos-Outcalt, Doug
Cannon, Robert Lawrence
Castle, Catherine
Charlson, Gary W.
Clark, Andrew
Collins, Thomas E.
Daggett, David Colby
De Leon, Louis Armando
Dickman, Frances Baker
Echeveste, Adolfo P.
Ehre, Stephen Jon
Francisco, Warren Barton
Freeman, Scott Day
Gallagher, Richard
Genna, Ignazio Edward
Gibson, Bonnie
Gleason, Christopher Mark
Gonzales, Luis Armando
Goronkin, Pamela Louise
Harowitz, David James
Hatton, Patricia Ann
Henderson, Eric Bryce
Herrera, José Manuel
Howell, Adrienne Y.
Inks, Peter Alfred
Johnson, Karl Joseph
Keck, John Martin
Kuby, Michael
Kuttner Ludwig G.
Lanning, Kimber Layne
LeSueur, Daniel M.
Littleton, Steven Johnson
Lucero, Frank A.
Mapstead, Jim
Martin, Elizabeth Louise
Mathis, Coleen Coyle
McNulty, Linda C.
McWhortor, Patrick
Miller, Jeffrey D.
Mills, Karen R.
Mohrweis, Lawrence Charles
Moore, James Harvey
Morrison, Todd Arnold
Narwid, Thomas A.
Overton, Timothy Warren
Perry, Micahel Reddick
Roe, William Garfitt
Rubin, Mark David
Russell, Crystal A.
Schnepf, Mark Edward
Schorr, S.L. "Si"
Schwalbe, Leslie Ann
Searles, William Aaron Montano
Shelton, John Michael
Shultz, Susan Fried
Silva, Margarita
Smith, Jimmie Dee
Smith, Ross Alan
Sossaman, Stephen J.
Spears, Linda
Stertz, Richard
Switsky, Terry June
Urias, Sr., Rodolfo Guerrero
Walker, Valerie
Werner, Lynn
White, Benny E.
Williams, Christian Moore
Winzer, Kimulet Wardie
Worden, Marshall A.
The Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission's website is here.
The Arizona Judicial Nominating Commissions' website is here. (The Commission on Appellate Court Appointments is one of the JNCs.)
Monday, October 18, 2010
Got some good news, got some bad news
OK, for some it's "bad news, good news"...
...Good news for the Schweikert campaign - this is his third campaign for Congress, and Jackass 3D was #1 at the box office this weekend. Sequels had some strength this weekend.
...Bad news for the Schweikert campaign - the election wasn't this weekend.
...Bad news for the Ken Bennett campaign - setting up an office in the basement of a lobbyist's office doesn't look good for a candidate for an office that is supposed to be all about integrity.
...Good news for Bennett - He's already set up his desk for his post-election job.
...Bad news for Ben "Tater Tot" Quayle in CD3 - a new poll shows him *behind* Democrat Jon Hulburd in the Republican-leaning district.
...Good news for Quayle - if he goes on to lose the race (and since his "unfavorables" are above 50%, that's a strong possibility), he should remember that the son of another famous politician lost his first campaign, a campaign for Congress. When George H.W. Bush tried to buy a seat in Congress for his son George W., the future "worst president ever" failed miserably to win what should have been a "safe" seat for any credible R candidate.
...Of course, that good news for Quayle isn't good news for the rest of us.
...Good news for the Brewer campaign - she's found a way to move attention away from concerns about her health and her ability to serve a full term in the Governor's office..
...Bad news for the Brewer campaign - that way involves irritating voters by hiding from them, decreasing the chance that after the election, she will have the opportunity to serve a full term.
Pic courtesy the Terry Goddard for Governor Facebook page...
At least she was consistent all day - she blew off senior voters during the day, and educators and students during the evening.
...Good news for the Schweikert campaign - this is his third campaign for Congress, and Jackass 3D was #1 at the box office this weekend. Sequels had some strength this weekend.
...Bad news for the Schweikert campaign - the election wasn't this weekend.
...Bad news for the Ken Bennett campaign - setting up an office in the basement of a lobbyist's office doesn't look good for a candidate for an office that is supposed to be all about integrity.
...Good news for Bennett - He's already set up his desk for his post-election job.
...Bad news for Ben "Tater Tot" Quayle in CD3 - a new poll shows him *behind* Democrat Jon Hulburd in the Republican-leaning district.
...Good news for Quayle - if he goes on to lose the race (and since his "unfavorables" are above 50%, that's a strong possibility), he should remember that the son of another famous politician lost his first campaign, a campaign for Congress. When George H.W. Bush tried to buy a seat in Congress for his son George W., the future "worst president ever" failed miserably to win what should have been a "safe" seat for any credible R candidate.
...Of course, that good news for Quayle isn't good news for the rest of us.
...Good news for the Brewer campaign - she's found a way to move attention away from concerns about her health and her ability to serve a full term in the Governor's office..
...Bad news for the Brewer campaign - that way involves irritating voters by hiding from them, decreasing the chance that after the election, she will have the opportunity to serve a full term.
Pic courtesy the Terry Goddard for Governor Facebook page...
At least she was consistent all day - she blew off senior voters during the day, and educators and students during the evening.
Letter to the editor regarding Harry Mitchell
Recently, but more than a week ago, I submitted a letter to the editor to the Arizona Republic. It was considered for publication, but apparently was passed over.
No problem. There are other outlets for my insightful (yet humble) observations. :)
The letter as submitted -
No problem. There are other outlets for my insightful (yet humble) observations. :)
The letter as submitted -
Dear Editor,Volunteer to help Harry keep helping us.
I urge everyone in the 5th Congressional District to support one of Arizona's longtime public servants, Congressman Harry Mitchell.
People, including me, may not agree with every single vote that he casts in Congress, but I've never disagreed with the motivation behind those votes - looking out for the best interests of his constituents.
Whether it is fighting for America's (and Arizona's) veterans, striving for fiscal responsibility in Washington, or working to strengthen our schools, Mitchell has always put his constituents first, and deserves our renewed support.
While his detractors like to ridicule him for "having his heart in the right place," they should consider the idea that in an ideal world, every elected official should have their hearts in the right place..
Voters can send a message by voting to reelect Harry Mitchell.
CD5 is one of the places that still values public service instead of vilifying it.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Public comment submitted to the Scottsdale City Council on Arizona American Water agenda item
The following comment was submitted to the Scottsdale City Council regarding item number 22 of Tuesday's agenda, consideration of options regarding the operations and facilities of Arizona American Water (see this earlier post for more info).
The comment -
The above comment is sure to annoy certain people (such as regular reader Thane :) ), but while I would strongly oppose a move to take property from one private owner in order to transfer it to another, more politically-favored, private owner (see Kelo v. New London), this truly is a matter of the public good.
The comment -
Mayor Lane and members of the Council,
By now, you are familiar with the history behind item 22 of this week's agenda - the discovery of contaminated groundwater in south Scottsdale, the clean up efforts, and particularly, the failures of Arizona American Water (AAW) to perform its duties in this regard.
Failures that exposed thousands of Scottsdale residents to contaminated drinking water.
On Tuesday, October 19, you will be considering two possible options for dealing with those failures.
One option is to engage in a "Treat and Transport" agreement with Arizona American Water. The City would handle the "treatment" (cleanup) of AAW water before forwarding it to AAW's system so that AAW could then deliver it to their customers.
The second option would be to acquire AAW's assets in the affected area through a condemnation proceeding and to bring those customers into the municipal water delivery system.
The report from City Staff cites low short-term costs and resource consumption as advantages of the "Treat and Transport" option while citing the opposite as among the disadvantages of the "condemnation" option.
City Staff favors the "Treat and Transport" approach (http://www.azcentral.com/community/scottsdale/articles/2010/10/15/20101015sr-azwater1016.html), however, I am urging you to give serious consideration to acquiring AAW's Scottsdale assets through condemnation.
To be certain, condemnation of private property is a serious issue and not something to be undertaken on a whim or lark. However, in this case it is wholly appropriate.
With its failures, AAW's operation has become a public health risk, one that merits the removal of AAW from Scottsdale (at a fair price, of course.)
The draft agreement included in the Council Report on this item does include insurance provisions, but those provisions do not cover liability incurred for failure to properly treat contaminated water.
The very reason that this item is before you.
Either option would result in the City assuming that liability. However, the "Treat and Transport" option would cause the City to incur that risk while AAW would retain the profit from the City's efforts to clean the contaminated water.
Much like the federal bailout of Wall Street, that kind of socialization of risk and privatization of profit hurts the public interest far more than it helps it.
Inevitably, a number of lobbyists for AAW will decry any move to condemn AAW's Scottsdale operation as an inappropriate interference with the "free market" and an improper abrogation of "private property rights."
And if the issue at hand concerned a Brown Avenue retailer selling overpriced yet substandard trinkets to tourists, I would agree with them. While sales to tourists are important to Scottsdale's economy, they aren't a matter of life or death.
However, the matter at hand it water, something we all need to survive. "Substandard" isn't good enough.
Those lobbyists will be looking to safeguard AAW's short-term interests, and that is their job.
Your job is to look after the long-term interests of the residents of Scottsdale.
Thank your for your time.
Regards,
[cpmaz]
The above comment is sure to annoy certain people (such as regular reader Thane :) ), but while I would strongly oppose a move to take property from one private owner in order to transfer it to another, more politically-favored, private owner (see Kelo v. New London), this truly is a matter of the public good.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Short Attention Span Musing
...Corporate influence has reached even to some of the races at the bottom of the ballot. The Arizona Multihousing Association is running robocalls in the University Lakes Justice of the Peace race. They're using John "Hut" Hutson, a former member of the Tempe City Council, to smear the JP candidacy of current State Senator Meg Burton Cahill. Earlier this year, they sent out a questionnaire to all JP candidates. A document with questions crafted to determine if judicial candidates are predisposed to favor them and if they would accept PAC money from them. (It includes the question "Will you accept PAC funds?")
Most of the sitting judges that I have heard saw the questionnaire thought that completing the survey could constitute an ethical violation for them. They were less sure about candidates for judicial office who aren't already judges.
Still, it will be interesting to find out if her opponent, a retired barber, filled out the questionnaire.
...David Schweikert'sapologists "supporters" have been responding to charges that Schweikert has profited from the misery of the housing crisis in Arizona by say that the real estate vulture hasn't done anything unethical, nor did he force any homeowners into foreclosure, and that in fact, all of his vultured properties were purchased directly from banks and other mortgage-holders.
They seem to have gone silent on the subject, other than to claim that accusations are all lies and that Schweikert is a saint with a perfect hairdo. That change in tactic is interesting given the timing - it occurred at the same time that news broke about how most banks engaged in poor, even fraudulent, practices when foreclosing on homes in many states.
Wonder how many of hisvultured "legally-obtained" properties were improperly foreclosed on by banks? Of course, given that this is Arizona, the land of practically-nonexistent consumer protection laws, we may never know...
...Finally in sad news, Arizona lost a statesman and voice for the voiceless on Friday with the passing of State Senator Jorge Luis Garcia. This year, he was a candidate for a seat on the Arizona Corporation Commission.
The praise for Garcia and the condolences for his family and friends has been pouring in.
From State Senator Meg Burton Cahill - " I join so many others in Arizona in sadness regarding our state senate Democratic Leader Jorge Garcia's death. I will miss his strength and grace under pressure...He was a public servant and statesman - always working to make sure those of little "voice" at the capitol were represented. I will miss his urging of "Have a peaceful day" daily."
From Tim Schmaltz, CEO of the Protecting Arizona's Family Coalition (PAFCO) - "He was a relentless advocate for the poor and vulnerable, a fellow social worker, and just a fine decent man. He had a gentle soul and cared deeply about family and community and vulnerable people. He was a great champion and ally. May he rest in peace! And may his family be comforted by much love and care. Amen."
(both quotes via Facebook)
From State Representative Kyrsten Sinema - "We have lost a friend today, and Arizona truly is grateful for Sen. Garcia’s tireless work on behalf of Arizonans, working every day to help others. He will be missed as a steward, as a colleague and as a family member. We offer our condolences to his loved ones."
(Courtesy the website of the Arizona House Democratic caucus)
From State Senator Rebecca Rios - "Senator Jorge Luis Garcia was a compassionate and humble man who tirelessly fought on the behalf of others. We will miss him greatly. We extend our condolences to his wife, Maria, children, Yvette, Dominique and Rolando and four grandchildren."
(Courtesy the website of the Arizona State Senate Democratic caucus)
From Don Bivens, chair of the Arizona Democratic Party - "We all mourn the tragic loss of Senator Jorge Luis Garcia. So many of us owe Jorge a debt of gratitude -- for his leadership, for standing up for the vulnerable among us, and for the lives he has touched. Democrats have lost a longtime friend and colleague. Arizona has lost a true public servant who had much more yet to give. And his family has lost a devoted husband, father and grandfather. We offer our deepest condolences to his loved ones during this difficult time."
(Via email)
The Arizona Republic's guestbook for Sen. Garcia is here.
I didn't know him well, but did meet him a few times during my activities as a blogger at the lege, and always found him to be warm, intelligent, and perceptive.
Some thoughts from southern Arizonans who knew him far better than me:
AZBlueMeanie at Blog for Arizona offers his perspective here.
The LD30 Democrats have their memories of Garcia here.
Tedski at Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion has his here.
Carolyn Classen, writer of "Carolyn's Community" at the Tucson Citizen, offers her memories here.
My deepest condolences go out to his family, friends and colleagues.
Most of the sitting judges that I have heard saw the questionnaire thought that completing the survey could constitute an ethical violation for them. They were less sure about candidates for judicial office who aren't already judges.
Still, it will be interesting to find out if her opponent, a retired barber, filled out the questionnaire.
...David Schweikert's
They seem to have gone silent on the subject, other than to claim that accusations are all lies and that Schweikert is a saint with a perfect hairdo. That change in tactic is interesting given the timing - it occurred at the same time that news broke about how most banks engaged in poor, even fraudulent, practices when foreclosing on homes in many states.
Wonder how many of his
...Finally in sad news, Arizona lost a statesman and voice for the voiceless on Friday with the passing of State Senator Jorge Luis Garcia. This year, he was a candidate for a seat on the Arizona Corporation Commission.
The praise for Garcia and the condolences for his family and friends has been pouring in.
From State Senator Meg Burton Cahill - " I join so many others in Arizona in sadness regarding our state senate Democratic Leader Jorge Garcia's death. I will miss his strength and grace under pressure...He was a public servant and statesman - always working to make sure those of little "voice" at the capitol were represented. I will miss his urging of "Have a peaceful day" daily."
From Tim Schmaltz, CEO of the Protecting Arizona's Family Coalition (PAFCO) - "He was a relentless advocate for the poor and vulnerable, a fellow social worker, and just a fine decent man. He had a gentle soul and cared deeply about family and community and vulnerable people. He was a great champion and ally. May he rest in peace! And may his family be comforted by much love and care. Amen."
(both quotes via Facebook)
From State Representative Kyrsten Sinema - "We have lost a friend today, and Arizona truly is grateful for Sen. Garcia’s tireless work on behalf of Arizonans, working every day to help others. He will be missed as a steward, as a colleague and as a family member. We offer our condolences to his loved ones."
(Courtesy the website of the Arizona House Democratic caucus)
From State Senator Rebecca Rios - "Senator Jorge Luis Garcia was a compassionate and humble man who tirelessly fought on the behalf of others. We will miss him greatly. We extend our condolences to his wife, Maria, children, Yvette, Dominique and Rolando and four grandchildren."
(Courtesy the website of the Arizona State Senate Democratic caucus)
From Don Bivens, chair of the Arizona Democratic Party - "We all mourn the tragic loss of Senator Jorge Luis Garcia. So many of us owe Jorge a debt of gratitude -- for his leadership, for standing up for the vulnerable among us, and for the lives he has touched. Democrats have lost a longtime friend and colleague. Arizona has lost a true public servant who had much more yet to give. And his family has lost a devoted husband, father and grandfather. We offer our deepest condolences to his loved ones during this difficult time."
(Via email)
The Arizona Republic's guestbook for Sen. Garcia is here.
I didn't know him well, but did meet him a few times during my activities as a blogger at the lege, and always found him to be warm, intelligent, and perceptive.
Some thoughts from southern Arizonans who knew him far better than me:
AZBlueMeanie at Blog for Arizona offers his perspective here.
The LD30 Democrats have their memories of Garcia here.
Tedski at Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion has his here.
Carolyn Classen, writer of "Carolyn's Community" at the Tucson Citizen, offers her memories here.
My deepest condolences go out to his family, friends and colleagues.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Scottsdale considering condemnation of AZAmWater assets within Scottsdale area
...and a astroturf "grassroots" private property rights group is mobilizing to stop it.
One of the items on Tuesday's agenda for the Scottsdale City Council has to do with "Arizona American Water Company Delivery Service Options." (warning: large .pdf. It make take a while to download, even with a high speed connection)
Arizona American Water provides water service to a small portion of Scottsdale, but one that is the source of problems out of all proportion to its size.
The affected area is part of the North Indian Bend Wash Superfund Site. It covers a section of south Scottsdale where industrial concerns disposed of waste in a way that contaminated the groundwater in the area.
Arizona American Water (AAW) operates one of the facilities built to treat (clean) the contaminated water, the Miller Road Treatment Facility (MRTF).
AAW would treat contaminated water and then mix it with the drinking water that they sell to portions of Scottsdale and Paradise Valley.
in 2007 and 2008, there were incidents at the MRTF that resulted in a significant quantity of un- and undertreated being pumped to residential customers in AAW's service area. (Info on the incidents here, here, here, and here.)
After the second incident, there was a lot of pressure on the Scottsdale City Council to look at acquiring the Scottsdale part of AAW's service area and to fold the customers into the City's water delivery system.
AAW and its parent company, American Waterworks (corporate headquarters in New Jersey), immediately objected and loudly proclaimed that the affected area wasn't for sale.
The Council at the time directed City sfaff to study the matter and to get back to them about it.
That's happening Tuesday, when City staff will present its report, evaluation, and recommendation that the Council choose one of two possible options.
1. Direct staff to bring forward a resolution authorizing a Treat and Transport Agreement with Arizona American Water Company “the Company” whereby the City will receive and treat the Company’s Central Arizona Project raw water allotment and deliver the finished water to the Company’s system at a metered Point of Delivery; OR
2. Direct staff to bring forward a resolution whereby the Council will authorize a condemnation proceeding to acquire all or a portion of Arizona American Water Company assets located within the Paradise Valley Water District and make appropriate findings of public use and necessity.
In the interim, an astroturf group (aka - a fake grassroots group) called the ORANGE Coalition (an acronym for "Organized Residents Against Needless Government Encroachment) was established, to fight all government uses of eminent domain and similar acquisitions of property. The group was formed as a non-profit corporation, effectively shielding its financing from public scrutiny, with its "domestic address" listed with the AZ Corporation Commission as "1025 LAUREL OAK RD., VOORHEES, NJ 08043" (since updated to a mail drop in Scottsdale).
That address is significant because it is the address of American Waterworks' corporate headquarters. And while the group's address has since been updated, one of the directors of the group, Daniel Kelleher, still lists his address as that of the corporate HQ. Kelleher is a "retired" executive of American Waterworks who has been retained by the company to fight efforts by local governments to acquire any of its "problem" operations in order to protect the affected residents/customers.
More background on the ORANGE Coalition here and here.
The ORANGE Coalition has put out a few email blasts, exhorting members of the community to come to the defense of AAW and protect it from condemnation proceedings, all in the name of private property rights.
None of their email messages mention AAW's penchant for pumping poison into its customers' homes.
In addition to the efforts of AAW/ORANGE to fill the City Hall Kiva with supporters on Tuesday night, there has been a media push - the Arizona Republic published an unsigned editorial criticizing the "condemnation" option and praise the "treat and transport" option, while KTVK (Channel 3) will be running a report on a "government takeover" of private property in Scottsdale a day or so before the Council meeting (based on a promo during Friday's late newscast). A more neutral (at least, a less obviously slanted) AZRep article on the matter is here.
Tuesday should be interesting in an "election year gymnastics" sort of way - Council members Wayne Ecton and Bob Littlefield are up for reelection in just a few weeks, and while they probably don't want to tick off their business community supporters by arguing and voting for condemnation, they also don't want to be seen as throwing thousands of Scottsdale residents under the corporate bus in the name of ever-greater profits.
Council member Ron McCullagh was/is one of AAW's customers and was the moving force behind consideration, and I expect that he will support the condemnation option.
Mayor Jim Lane will oppose condemnation, and Council member Lisa Borowsky will follow his lead, as will Council member Marg Nelssen.
That leaves Council member Suzanne Klapp, and I don't have a read on her on this matter.
Prediction time: A 4-3 or 5-2 vote in favor of the "treat and transport" option - it's got that mix of being seen as "doing something" while "not being too rash."
The perfect two-step for an election year.
One of the items on Tuesday's agenda for the Scottsdale City Council has to do with "Arizona American Water Company Delivery Service Options." (warning: large .pdf. It make take a while to download, even with a high speed connection)
Arizona American Water provides water service to a small portion of Scottsdale, but one that is the source of problems out of all proportion to its size.
The affected area is part of the North Indian Bend Wash Superfund Site. It covers a section of south Scottsdale where industrial concerns disposed of waste in a way that contaminated the groundwater in the area.
Arizona American Water (AAW) operates one of the facilities built to treat (clean) the contaminated water, the Miller Road Treatment Facility (MRTF).
AAW would treat contaminated water and then mix it with the drinking water that they sell to portions of Scottsdale and Paradise Valley.
in 2007 and 2008, there were incidents at the MRTF that resulted in a significant quantity of un- and undertreated being pumped to residential customers in AAW's service area. (Info on the incidents here, here, here, and here.)
After the second incident, there was a lot of pressure on the Scottsdale City Council to look at acquiring the Scottsdale part of AAW's service area and to fold the customers into the City's water delivery system.
AAW and its parent company, American Waterworks (corporate headquarters in New Jersey), immediately objected and loudly proclaimed that the affected area wasn't for sale.
The Council at the time directed City sfaff to study the matter and to get back to them about it.
That's happening Tuesday, when City staff will present its report, evaluation, and recommendation that the Council choose one of two possible options.
1. Direct staff to bring forward a resolution authorizing a Treat and Transport Agreement with Arizona American Water Company “the Company” whereby the City will receive and treat the Company’s Central Arizona Project raw water allotment and deliver the finished water to the Company’s system at a metered Point of Delivery; OR
2. Direct staff to bring forward a resolution whereby the Council will authorize a condemnation proceeding to acquire all or a portion of Arizona American Water Company assets located within the Paradise Valley Water District and make appropriate findings of public use and necessity.
In the interim, an astroturf group (aka - a fake grassroots group) called the ORANGE Coalition (an acronym for "Organized Residents Against Needless Government Encroachment) was established, to fight all government uses of eminent domain and similar acquisitions of property. The group was formed as a non-profit corporation, effectively shielding its financing from public scrutiny, with its "domestic address" listed with the AZ Corporation Commission as "1025 LAUREL OAK RD., VOORHEES, NJ 08043" (since updated to a mail drop in Scottsdale).
That address is significant because it is the address of American Waterworks' corporate headquarters. And while the group's address has since been updated, one of the directors of the group, Daniel Kelleher, still lists his address as that of the corporate HQ. Kelleher is a "retired" executive of American Waterworks who has been retained by the company to fight efforts by local governments to acquire any of its "problem" operations in order to protect the affected residents/customers.
More background on the ORANGE Coalition here and here.
The ORANGE Coalition has put out a few email blasts, exhorting members of the community to come to the defense of AAW and protect it from condemnation proceedings, all in the name of private property rights.
None of their email messages mention AAW's penchant for pumping poison into its customers' homes.
In addition to the efforts of AAW/ORANGE to fill the City Hall Kiva with supporters on Tuesday night, there has been a media push - the Arizona Republic published an unsigned editorial criticizing the "condemnation" option and praise the "treat and transport" option, while KTVK (Channel 3) will be running a report on a "government takeover" of private property in Scottsdale a day or so before the Council meeting (based on a promo during Friday's late newscast). A more neutral (at least, a less obviously slanted) AZRep article on the matter is here.
Tuesday should be interesting in an "election year gymnastics" sort of way - Council members Wayne Ecton and Bob Littlefield are up for reelection in just a few weeks, and while they probably don't want to tick off their business community supporters by arguing and voting for condemnation, they also don't want to be seen as throwing thousands of Scottsdale residents under the corporate bus in the name of ever-greater profits.
Council member Ron McCullagh was/is one of AAW's customers and was the moving force behind consideration, and I expect that he will support the condemnation option.
Mayor Jim Lane will oppose condemnation, and Council member Lisa Borowsky will follow his lead, as will Council member Marg Nelssen.
That leaves Council member Suzanne Klapp, and I don't have a read on her on this matter.
Prediction time: A 4-3 or 5-2 vote in favor of the "treat and transport" option - it's got that mix of being seen as "doing something" while "not being too rash."
The perfect two-step for an election year.
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Felecia Rotellini on KNXV-TV
Could the Republican reliance on secret third party contributions undercut the 2010 "wave"?
Two step recipe for screwing up what should have been a walkover election season for the Republicans:
One - nominate a number of unelectable candidates (like this one).
Two - get caught being arrogantly, overwhelmingly, sleazy. Sleazy to the point of being anti-American.
One of the expected effects of the Citizens United v. FEC ruling earlier this year was the infusion of massive amounts of corporate money into this (and future) election cycles.
That expectation has come to fruition, in spades, with nearly $200 million spent by "outside" groups on U.S. Senate and House races just since September 1.
And while Democrats are leading in traditional, candidate-focused, fundraising and spending, they are being outspent by 9:1 or 10:1 depending on who is doing the scorekeeping. All observers agree however, that Republican-leaning groups are totally swamping their Democratic-leaning counterparts.
Into that mix, add the $75 million that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is spending to buy Republican control of Congress, money raised anonymously from questionable, possibly foreign, sources.
Now stir and simmer for a bit, and then do a little polling on the subject.
Two polls came out in the last couple of days that independently reinforce each other.
One, commissioned by Allegheny College and conducted by Zogby International, shows that nearly 2/3 of Americans across all partisan, age, and economic demographics, oppose the idea of groups spending heavily in districts in which they aren't located.
The other, commissioned by MoveOn.org and conducted by SurveyUSA, shows that 84% of all voters believe that they have a right to know who is funding political advertisements and most will be less likely to trust candidates supported by anonymous backers.
Looking at the data (and I've done an admittedly superficial overview here), the conclusion seems to be that Americans of all strips are saying -
1. Outside groups butt out!
2. If you're going to ignore that, tell us who you are and who is paying for your message, otherwise we may not vote for your candidate.
It remains to be seen if the average voter is going to look at the overwhelming support that anonymously-funded outside groups have provided for GOP candidates (almost all of whom are pushing regressive economic policies that will benefit large and foreign corporations) before casting their ballots.
Guess we'll just have to wait for the November 3rd and beyond election post-mortems to figure that out.
One - nominate a number of unelectable candidates (like this one).
Two - get caught being arrogantly, overwhelmingly, sleazy. Sleazy to the point of being anti-American.
One of the expected effects of the Citizens United v. FEC ruling earlier this year was the infusion of massive amounts of corporate money into this (and future) election cycles.
That expectation has come to fruition, in spades, with nearly $200 million spent by "outside" groups on U.S. Senate and House races just since September 1.
And while Democrats are leading in traditional, candidate-focused, fundraising and spending, they are being outspent by 9:1 or 10:1 depending on who is doing the scorekeeping. All observers agree however, that Republican-leaning groups are totally swamping their Democratic-leaning counterparts.
Into that mix, add the $75 million that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is spending to buy Republican control of Congress, money raised anonymously from questionable, possibly foreign, sources.
Now stir and simmer for a bit, and then do a little polling on the subject.
Two polls came out in the last couple of days that independently reinforce each other.
One, commissioned by Allegheny College and conducted by Zogby International, shows that nearly 2/3 of Americans across all partisan, age, and economic demographics, oppose the idea of groups spending heavily in districts in which they aren't located.
The other, commissioned by MoveOn.org and conducted by SurveyUSA, shows that 84% of all voters believe that they have a right to know who is funding political advertisements and most will be less likely to trust candidates supported by anonymous backers.
Looking at the data (and I've done an admittedly superficial overview here), the conclusion seems to be that Americans of all strips are saying -
1. Outside groups butt out!
2. If you're going to ignore that, tell us who you are and who is paying for your message, otherwise we may not vote for your candidate.
It remains to be seen if the average voter is going to look at the overwhelming support that anonymously-funded outside groups have provided for GOP candidates (almost all of whom are pushing regressive economic policies that will benefit large and foreign corporations) before casting their ballots.
Guess we'll just have to wait for the November 3rd and beyond election post-mortems to figure that out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)