Thank a Veteran today...

The wars may not have been of their choosing (or ours, for that matter), but the service was.

A list of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs' Vet Centers in Arizona is here.

VA medical facilities in Arizona - Prescott, Phoenix, Tucson.

A list of VA benefits offices in Arizona is here.

The website of the Arizona Veterans Home (Phoenix) is here; Tucson facility (scheduled to open in late 2011) here.

2012 speculation: The beginning

One of the things that happens at the end of every election cycle is the beginning of the next, and one of the things that happens at the beginning of every cycle is idle speculation about who may be running for what. 

That's what this post is all about.

No candidates were actually spoken to for this post - wouldn't want actual journalism to muddy up the waters. :)

This is all based on previous expressions of interest, rumors, or some actions that have indicated the possible desire for a higher office.

On to the speculations...

US Senate:  Jon Kyl's seat is up in 2012, and the R nod is his for the taking.  If he chooses not to run, look for Jeff Flake and John Shadegg's names to be floated prominently.  They would be considered "traditional" candidates in that they've bided their time waiting for their turns at the "brass ring" of a Senate slot.  If Kyl's seat becomes an "open" one, also look for at least one long shot/tea party type to challenge the traditional candidates as not being "Republican" enough.

As for the Democratic side, I've got no idea, though there's been talk that CD8 Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords would be the strongest candidate.  Terry Goddard's name also frequently pops up.

US House of Representatives:  Expectations are that Arizona will gain a seat in Congress after redistricting.

Assuming so, that will create a free-for-all situation here.

All three freshman Rs (Ben Quayle, David Schweikert, Paul Gosar) face the likelihood that there will be primary challenges in their new districts, though Quayle's access to daddy's money and connections may serve to fend off R challengers before they get started.

As I'm not a Republican, I can't even begin to guess which ones will jump in.

Also, two names that are sure to be in the mix, at least until they say they *aren't* - Harry Mitchell and Ann Kirkpatrick, the recently defeated Democratic incumbents in CD5 and CD1, respectively.

Other names floating around:

State Representative (soon to be "State Senator") Kyrsten Sinema (D).  Likely to go after a "new" seat, but some (OK, me) think that she should consider going after Quayle.  While she is seen by some observers as too liberal for that district, she is also smart, attractive, energetic, and accomplished.  The contrast with Quayle (pen name: Brock Landers) could give her a leg up in that race.  She has also been elevating her profile while *not* going for a leadership slot in the AZ Senate, leaving her the time to explore a run.

State Representative (soon to be "State Senator") David Schapira (D).  May be a little too soon (he's young and may wait a few cycles), but also may go after whatever district that Tempe becomes part of after redistricting.

Tempe Mayor Hugh Hallman (R).  Long been rumored to be interested in a trip to D.C,, but also has long been rumored to be smart enough to not try to take on Harry Mitchell directly.

State Representative Chad Campbell (D).  Mostly because I am on his email list, and have read some of what he has written this year.  He is way too smart to stay in the Arizona legislature (to be fair, any one of my shoes is too smart to stay in the Arizona legislature, but my shoes don't communicate as well as Campbell. :) )

State Representative Chris Deschene (D).  He may have fallen short in his bid for the Secretary of State's office, but he has built the relationships needed for a run at higher office.  In addition, he obviously has aspirations to higher office.  To that combination add in the influence of the Native American communities have in northern AZ politics, and you have a mixture that could end up in a run for D.C.

State Representative (soon to be "State Senator") Michelle Reagan (R).  If she decides to primary Schweikert, she'll automatically be one of the strongest challengers.  She's got some deep ties in the district, is on an upward trajectory politically, has moved farther right than the president with her last name and actually works for her district on occasion (an unusual occurrence in AZGOP circles).  She's still young, so she may wait a couple of cycles.

Other names that may take a look at a run: Susan Bitter Smith (R), who is *always* running for Congress; Laura Knaperek (R), making a lucrative living as a corporate lobbyist, but if Mitchell stays retired, may go for it; Kris Mayes (R), seen as too "moderate" and too much of a "public servant" in Republican circles, but if the next two years are as ugly (in a "circular firing squad" sort of way) as many expect it to be, she may gain an opening; and Andrew Thomas, the former Maricopa County Attorney - he'll need something to do if/when he is disbarred.

One factor to keep in mind:  Under federal law, candidates for Congress do NOT have to live in the district that they are running for, they just have to live in the state.  Hence the number of Maricopa County types who have run in northern AZ in recent years.

Other offices:

Maricopa County sheriff -

The R nod is Arpaio's as long as he wants it.  If he steps down or retires (and the only thing that will motivate him to do that is a federal felony conviction), look for Russell Pearce or John Kavanagh, or maybe outgoing State Senator Chuck Gray, to go for the job.  All three have the "former cop" entry on their resumes, so they have credibility with those who want someone who knows law enforcement in the job, and all three are hardcore nativists of wide renown, so they have credibility with the same bigots who love incumbent Arpaio.

On the Democratic side, former Buckeye police chief Dan Saban, the 2008 nominee, has expressed an interest in running again.  Not sure who else is interested.

Maricopa County Attorney -

Bill Montgomery, the man elected to serve out Andrew Thomas' unexpired term, will likely get the R nod, unless he gets caught up in the federal investigations of Arpaio and Thomas.

On the Democratic side, no clue here.  However, I would like to see Felecia Rotellini to stay involved and active.  She was easily the strongest candidate on the Ds' statewide slate this year, and has a strong future set up.  This or a Congressional run could be in the offing.


Other names of folks likely to run for *some* office somewhere, or whose names will at least be floated:  Phil Gordon, the soon-to-be-termed-out Mayor of Phoenix; Greg Patterson, Republican blogger and former legislator.  Rumored to be likely to take a job with his close friend David Schweikert, but that won't preclude him from running for office; Mary Manross, the former mayor of Scottsdale; and Dennis Burke, US Attorney for Arizona and former chief of staff for then-Governor Janet Napolitano.


That's it for now, but there are sure to be follow-ups as more people enter/exit the arena, and as the redistricting process takes place and the make-up of districts becomes clearer...

Time for the post-mortems to start. First up - The local daily

I've been feeling a little burned out after last week's elections and haven't been writing much (and before certain folks accuse me of being a sore loser, I went through the same thing in 2006 and 2008, which were much more Dem-friendly years). 

So, with the author's permission, I am publishing the following piece written by friend and inspiration Lauren Kuby, chair of the LD17 Democratic Party and super-volunteer and organizer.

Besides being those things and more, she's also one of the best at channelling outrage into the written word.

The formative roots of the piece, as explained in it, are based in the period immediately following the Rep's endorsement of David Schweikert.  The Rep asked Lauren to write a response to their endorsement, then refused to publish it.

The piece, and an email she wrote after it became clear that they had backed off from publishing the original piece or even a shortened one -

To The Arizona Republic Editorial Board:
After a lengthy discussion with Phil Boas over your Board’s endorsement of Schweikert over Mitchell some weeks ago, Phil asked me to pen a 500-word reaction piece. Although in the midst of organizing Tempe Democrats, I jumped at the opportunity and submitted a My Turn piece the very next day, October 16th.

Days went by without acknowledgement. I decided to bowdlerize the piece, removing the Gannett references, which I assumed (rightly or wrongly) might have given Phil second thoughts about his offer. I called Phil when I still didn’t hear back, and he demurred that he ever asked me to write about the Schweikert endorsement, but was suggesting I lend my voice to political/environmental issues in the future (although why he would ask me to write up 500 words over the weekend is anyone's guess). Phil also said that publishing my reaction piece would open the floodgates for responses from Schweikert said and that there wasn’t room in the Op-Ed page. His suggestion was to condense it to 200 words for a Letter to the Editor. Needless to say, the condensed version never made it into the paper either.

The experience left me feeling that my time was wasted and that The Republic didn't want to air a sharp counterpoints to its endorsements (although the McCain/Kyl attack on Gabby Giffords saw much ink that week!)

I want you all to read the unpublished piece Phil asked me to write but declined to publish. Perhaps you will better understand the sense of betrayal that many of your former subscribers (22 years for me) felt upon reading the paper that morning. I know there was great disagreement among Board members on the Schweikert endorsement, but it strikes me that you often take your orders from the Big Boys (Gannett, McCain, Kyl) and aim to predict the winners (Quayle, Brewer, Burns & Pierce) rather than base your endorsements on your editorial-board priorities.

I don't expect your Board to use my ballot as its guide to endorsements, as Phil argued on the phone, but I was greatly disappointed to discover that you do not walk your own talk.

Sincerely,

Lauren Kuby

----

October 16, 2010

To the Arizona Republic Editorial Board:

I am sure I was not alone in my shock and disappointment to see that a newspaper that supports education, high-tech innovation, and renewable energy would turn its back on Congressman Harry Mitchell, who has championed those issues in Congress. Contrast this with David Schweikert’s radical proposal to eliminate the Department of Education, removing a billion dollars from K-12 education, Pell Grants, and student loans in Arizona. To top it off, Schweikerts’s energy plan is to drill in ANWR—not a comprehensive solution to our energy challenges.

Congressman Mitchell is a teacher who co-authored the new GI Bill for our veterans. As a result, over 1000 students at ASU (300,000 nationally) are bettering their lives and improving our economy. David Schweikert envisions an education system where the only way you can get to home plate is if you’re born on third base. A district that is home to an entrepreneurial university—not to mention an outsized portion of Arizona’s high-tech manufacturing base—deserves far better.

And you cannot logically argue that Harry Mitchell is not an advocate for the business community. The US Chamber of Commerce endorsed him for his pro-business record, and he wants to extend the Bush tax cuts! As a progressive, I may disagree, but I trust his decision making and the integrity he brings to his role as my representative.

Harry has a centrist voting record and is a moderate. He truly reflects his district, one more or less equally divided among Democrats, Independents, and Republicans. He is a genuine Arizona statesman along the lines of Mo Udall and Barry Goldwater.

The editorial board’s betrayal of Mitchell, who they endorsed previously, was also odd in light of your tortured rationales in support of extremely partisan incumbent lawmakers. You argued, for example, that Jeff Flake and Trent Franks fit the character of their overwhelmingly Republican districts, even though they completely reject the paper’s editorial priorities. Yet Harry doesn’t complement his moderate-leaning district? Ridiculous.

David Schweikert caters to a narrow, radical segment of his party. If he ever dared reach across the aisle to work towards a bipartisan solution—as Harry does with every issue he’s tackled—his far-right base would show him the door.

I thought the Republic understood these dynamics when they endorsed moderate Susan Bitter Smith in the GOP primary. But now this surprising about-face, and all because Mitchell supported decades-in-the-waiting reform of our broken healthcare system?

I have a few questions for the editorial board.

Where is your empathy for people who have been cast adrift by insurance companies and bankrupted simply because they got sick?

When you were judging Harry Mitchell, did you think about your Republic colleagues that were downsized by Gannett, thrown into unemployment and uncertainty? Which of you will be next?

Will you be able to keep health insurance for yourself or your family? Will you be able to get another policy if you’ve been sick and have a pre-existing condition?

Not if David Schweikert has anything to with it.

Lauren Kuby
Chair, District 17 Democrats (Tempe/South Scottsdale)

The Arizona Republic, like most newspapers, has experienced a sharp decline in readership and ad revenue over the last few years, and it doesn't seem as if the bottom is in sight. 

Much of their support for Republicans this year (and in years past), even really *bad* Republicans (Quayle, Ducey, Schweikert, etc.), can be attributed to the Rs' promises of a return to "Business As Usual."

Could one of the members of the Rep's editorial board please explain to me, in uncomplicated concepts and short words (appropriate for a simple blogger)?

How does assisting the Rs in their quest to turn Arizona into a political, economic and social wasteland, with the resultant exodus of residents to other states with a healthier societal infrastructure, does ANYTHING to increase the circulation of their publication?

Comments are open, and my email address is on the sidebar.

Keith Olbermann's suspension lifted; scheduled to return Tuesday

As most politically-active people have no doubt heard, MSNBC commentator Keith Olbermann was suspended by a network executive late last week for making legal contributions to Democratic candidates this year.

Even though other MSNBC commentators like Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan have made similar contributions to Republicans in the past without penalty.

After the news of the suspension broke last week, there was a nationwide uproar and MSNBC came in for some withering criticism, from all across the political spectrum.

Today, after listening to the words of support for Olbermann (and doing the math - Olbermann's show is easily the highest rated on the network, and what he did wasn't something that was professionally unethical or illegal, or otherwise embarrassing to the network.  The powerplay just isn't worth the lost viewers and ad revenues.), the network executive who imposed the suspension has lifted it.

From NBC's press release on the matter -

From Phil Griffin, President of MSNBC:

After several days of deliberation and discussion, I have determined that suspending Keith through and including Monday night's program is an appropriate punishment for his violation of our policy. We look forward to having him back on the air Tuesday night.

Olbermann's tweeted response -

Greetings From Exile! A quick, overwhelmed, stunned THANK YOU for support that feels like a global hug & obviously left me tweetless XO

Thanks to NPR for the heads-up on both the press release and the Twitter link.

Later...

The AZ Republic is applying some fresh Chapstick and puckering up

The editorial board of the Arizona Republic is kissing up to the Republicans in AZ's delegation to Congress (I won't engage in unseemly speculation about which part of the Rs they are trying to kiss :) ).

The latest indication of this activity is the poorly written love letter masquerading as an "analysis" piece that the Rep published on Sunday.

The piece -

Vote gives Arizona more clout in Congress

The midterm elections will likely boost Arizona's clout in Congress, giving the state's new delegation greater power in crafting legislation and deciding how billions of federal taxpayer dollars will be spent.

Among the results, Arizona lawmakers say, could be increased highway funds for the state, more money for border security and even the passage of legislation to allow the construction of a huge, controversial new copper mine near Superior.

The growing influence of the state begins in the U.S. House. A new Republican majority among Arizona's House delegation ensures that Arizona's voice will be heard by the GOP House leaders who take control in January.

More "influence" in the House?

More federal projects for Arizona?

Riiiiiggghhhht...

Let's see:

Jeff Flake (CD6) has made a career out of taking an apparently principled stand against earmarks or any projects for his district (to be fair to Flake, it isn't just his district - like Mikey of Life Cereal fame, he hates *everything.*  Unlike the fictional character Mikey however, he doesn't change in the face of reality), but he wins reelection every year in his R-heavy district because he is well-coiffed, smiles a lot, and he isn't an embarrassment (say, in the mold of J.D. Hayworth).

Trent Franks (CD2) actively works against highway money for his district.  He will occasionally support a local project, but those usually involve the construction of jails or the purchase of some new technology for law enforcement.  And even in that, he seems almost ashamed for doing something that might possibly help his constituents (even if it's less "helping his constituents" and more "helping to imprison his constituents").  In fact, the only thing he exhibits any enthusiasm around is his quest to destroy a woman's right to choose.

Newly-electeds Paul Gosar (CD1) and David Schweikert (CD5) were elected on tea party/pro-corporate platforms and seem unlikely to support any efforts to help Arizonans...unless those Arizonans have last names that can be abbreviated "Corp.", "Inc.", or "LLC".  And have contributed to their campaigns.

The newly-elected Ben Quayle (CD3) may be the House member most likely to support projects for his district.  He's got two years to establish his "representative" bona fides before running for reelection after the redistricting process changes his district.  Still, given his daddy's (and his daddy's friends') heavy involvement in his campaign, he seems likely to favor projects that will help the companies of his donors, not his constituents.

As for AZ's contingent in the U.S. Senate, both Jon Kyl and John McCain have been in D.C. for decades, and for decades, they haven't worked for Arizona.

Kyl openly works for Big Business, protecting their interests to the exclusion of all else, including the interests of the average Arizonan.

McCain openly works for John McCain.  Period.


The article is right about one thing, though. 

The change in the partisan balance in Congress, and in Arizona's delegation to Congress, will almost certainly mean that the Resolution Copper land swap/swipe will go through.  Of course, while that is sold as a benefit to Arizonans (in the form of mining jobs and tax revenue, while ignoring the multi-generational costs of a destroyed environment and watershed, and the savaging of ancestral Native lands held in "trust" by the federal government), the big beneficiary will be a large, multi-national corporation, Rio Tinto.

Rio Tinto (or its Resolution Copper subsidiary) has donated directly to the campaign committees, or to mining industry PACs that donated to the campaign committees, of almost every R member of AZ's delegation.  I couldn't find any direct or indirect contributions to Gosar in the time allotted for this post.

The results of Tuesday's elections will almost certainly result in more influence in Congress for the Rs in Arizona's Congressional delegation.  It almost certainly won't result in more influence in Congress for Arizona.


Certain people (and newspapers) in Arizona like to complain that AZ doesn't get its "fair share" of federal projects.

They may be correct.


So why do they continue to support candidates and electeds who are dedicated to opposing projects for Arizona?

Russell Pearce showing his eloquence and poise in the face of dissension

Thanks go out to Stephen Lemons of the Phoenix New Times for the heads-up on this video of Pearce's response when he was confronted by a supporter of the DREAM Act.



In summary:  Pearce has nothing more than bumper sticker slogans to buttress his nativist ideology.  The man loves to spout "the rule of law!" when talking about oppressing people with brown skin (as he does in the above video), but when dealing with well-connected white people, DUI convictions are just minor details, and should be removed from the driver's record.

Something tells me that I'm going to have a lot to write about over the next two years...

Over/Under

I'm not a betting man, and I'm most definitely not a bookie, but there are a few things that are all but certain to happen in the near future.  The only real question is "how much?", "how many?" or "when?".

The following is for entertainment purposes only - no betting allowed.

...Percentage of the new Republican members of Congress who survive redistricting to win a second term?  75 percent.

...Percentage of the new Republican members of Congress who will face an investigation, indictment or an outright perp walk by the end of a second term?  15 percent (hey, when you elect a bunch of people who thing public service is a dirty, even contemptible, business, many will use that belief to rationalize being dirty and contemptible themselves).

...How long before failed tea party Senate candidate Christine "I am not a witch" O'Donnell appears on "Dancing With The Stars"?  1.5 years.

...How long before "Tea Party Senate President-Elect Russell Pearce" changes the dress code at the Capitol to require members of the Senate to wear sheets and hoods during floor sessions and committee hearings?  2 weeks into the session.

...How long before failed tea party Senate candidate Christine "I am not a witch" O'Donnell receives an offer to appear in the pages of Playboy?  2.5 years.

...How long before Jan Brewer, citing health concerns, resigns from office, leaving Ken Bennett as Arizona's governor?  3 years.

...How long before failed tea party Senate candidate Christine "I am not a witch" O'Donnell *accepts* the offer to appear in the pages of Playboy?  3.5 years.

...How long before there is a widespread grassroots movement supporting a new law to requre registration and licencing of broomsticks?  3.01 years.

...How long before Russell Pearce bursts out in laughter before killing any bill creating such a law and muttering something about the free market taking care of the problem by offering access to petroleum jelly for those who can pay?  3.02 years.


Anybody want to add their own?

Keith Olbermann "suspended" for donating to Democratic candidates

Time to boycott MSNBC.

Not for their suspension of Olbermann for violating what could be a legitimate company policy.

Boycott them for it NOT being a legitimate and equitably applied company policy.

Earlier in the decade, noted Republicans and MSNBC personalities Joe Scarbrough and Pat Buchanan made contributions to Republican candidates.

They got a free pass from MSNBC brass.

Fox News uses fabricated stories to attack Democrats and other public servants; MSNBC now uses the power of the paycheck to silence people who tell the truth.


So be it.


CNN is now my cable TV source for news.

Especially since when I called MSNBC to urge them to un-suspend Olbermann, the operator shunted me to a recorded line, and did so without even letting me know she was doing it.

Boycott MSNBC.

Blue Dogs not getting it

One of the few Blue Dogs who survived Tuesday's carnage can't do math - he's looking at the fact that the Blue Dog Democrats in Congress took it on the chin while most of the Progressives turned back challengers as a sign that Nancy Pelosi is too liberal and shouldn't be part of Democratic leadership in the new Congress.

From NewsOK -

U.S. Rep. Dan Boren, D-Muskogee, joined a growing chorus of conservative Democrats who want a new leader in the House in the wake of the party’s devastating losses in the House. Some conservative Democrats who survived on Tuesday have been quoted publicly as saying that they don’t want Speaker Nancy Pelosi, of California, to be the House minority leader next year. Boren agrees.


He released this statement this morning:

“I cannot in good conscience support Nancy Pelosi as Leader. I intend to support a more conservative Democrat alternative.”

I am deeply saddened to see Harry Mitchell. a Blue Dog himself, lose on Tuesday (he has always been about "good governance" and working for his constituents), but many of the Blue Dogs who lost brought this on themselves. 
 
By opposing things like real health care reform, strong Wall Street regulation, and an effective economic stimulus package, they freely allied themselves with the Republican obstructionists and terminally undermined the ability of the Democrats to make real progress in addressing the economic woes facing the United States.
 
And all of the polling that I've seen says that frustration with the economy, not a liking for the Republicans, was the main motivator behind the independent voters' swing toward the Rs.
 
Boren and the rest of his BD associates can blame Nancy Pelosi all that they want, but if they want to assess blame, they should first blame those that they see in the mirror.
 
BTW - did anyone notice Boren's use of the word "Democrat" where anybody but a Republican would have used "Democratic"?
 
He's changing parties, probably during the 2011 session of Congress.
 
More on the Blue Dogs' decimation from Joe Klein of Time here.

To those voters who voted for the Republicans because they believe that the Rs are better for the economy -

Private sector job growth, courtesy Washington Monthly

The red bars indicate the private sector growth/shrinkage during the Bush administration; the blue bars indicate the same during the Obama administration.

Talk about voting against your own self-interest...

Psst! I gots a proposition for you...

Everybody knows about the Republican gains in Tuesday's elections, but there hasn't been significant coverage of the ballots propositions.  There's been a little, but...

Anyway, on to the results.

Note: all numbers have been rounded, and the final margins could change due to early and provisional ballots.

Proposition 106, the anti-health care reform amendment to the AZ Constitution:  Approved by the voters 705,000 to 569,000.  Benefitted from more than $2 million in funding, mostly from the health insurance industry.

Proposition 107, the anti-affirmative action amendment to the AZ Constitution:  Approved by the voters 752.000 to 511,000.

Proposition 109, the amendment to the AZ Constitution to create a right to hunt and fish equal to other constitutionally-protected civil rights like free speech and freedom of religion.  Also would have prevented voters from passing any ballot questions that would have effected wildlife management.  Failed 569,000 - 724,000.

Proposition 110, an amendment to the AZ Constitution that would allow the exchange of state trust lands near military bases for other lands.  Failing right now, but at 625,000 - 631,000, it's still close enough to flip once all ballots are counted.

Proposition 111 - an amendment to the AZ Constitution that would have changed the job title of the Secretary of State to "Lieutenant Governor" and compelled the primary winners from each party for Governor and Lt. Governor to run as a ticket.  Sloppily written - also would have disenfranchised independent candidates and voters.  Failed 522,000 to 745,000.

Proposition 112 - an amendment to the AZ Constitution that would have reduced the amount of time available to collect signatures to put a question on the ballot.  Failing by approximately 1600 votes as of this writing.

Proposition 113 - an anti-union amendment to the AZ Constitution.  Heavily funded by secretive industry groups.  Passed 775,000 - 502,000.

Proposition 203 - legalizing Medical Marijuana.  Still close, but leading at this point by approximately 7000 votes.

Proposition 301 - ending the voter-mandated and -protected Land Conservation Fund and sweeping the monies into the state's general fund so the lege can give them to corporations in the form of tax breaks.  Failed 329,000 - 934,000.

Proposition 302 - ending the voter-mandated and -protected First Things First, an early childhood education and health program.  Failed 393,000 - 895,000.

Summary:  the demonization measures (anti - healthcare, affirmative action, and unions) passed easily, while the ones that reduce the influence of the voters (Lt. Gov. signature deadlines, overriding previously approved voter initiatives) have failed or are failing.  Medical Marijuana is passing, as it has passed many times before, but by the closest margin in its history.  It may still flip as provisional ballots and late arriving early ballots are counted.

Bottom line:  while demagoguery worked for the Rs in terms of the candidate races and the three demonization amendments, when it came to practical issues of governance, the voters haven't toed the R party line.  There's a lesson there.



Some local ballot questions (mostly Scottsdale, with a few others thrown in for fun):

Scottsdale bond question #1 (transportation infrastructure) - Failed 25,000 - 33,000

Scottsdale bond question #2 (public safety infrastructure) - Failed 24,000 - 34,000.

Scottsdale question 411 (restricting the City's use of eminent domain, pushed by American Water to prevent any possible takeover of its operations in Scottsdale, no matter how much contaminated water it pumps to its customers here) - Passed 26,000 - 23,000.

Scottsdale question 412 (keeping the City from expending money on an organization like the Scottsdale Area Chamber of Congress) - Passed 26,000 - 24,000.

Scottsdale 413 (removing the Charter requirement that the City Council address citizen petitions in a timely manner) - Failed 23,000 - 26,000.

Scottsdale 414 (clarifying the status of the City's charter officers, including requiring that the City Treasurer's position be filled independently and not by another Officer, such as the City Manager) - Passed 24,000 - 23,000.

Scottsdale 415 (relating to clarifying which City employees are subject to direct Council control) - Passed 25,000 - 23,000.

Scottsdale 416 and 417 (housekeeping measures mostly, that clarified unclear language in the charter) - Passed comfortably.

Mesa 420 (a new spring training facility for the Chicago Cubs) - Passed 51,000 - 30,000.

As for school-related questions, generally speaking, budget overrides (even those that were just continuations of long-standing overrides) failed while bond questions for infrastructure improvements passed.  In other words, the voters in those areas voted to have schools with pretty exteriors and little substance inside of them.

Later...

Polishing the crystal ball...

In the least surprising news rising from the aftermath of Tuesday's elections, Russell Pearce (R-National Alliance) was elected by the R caucus to be the president of the Arizona State Senate.  A couple of other senators (Yarbrough, Pierce) were mentioned as being interested, but the only thing that would have prevented Pearce from taking over the Senate would have been if he accepted a patronage job from Jan Brewer.

However, while an agency head gets a bigger paycheck than a legislator (at least, more pay that's "on the books"), in practical political terms, the only person with more political juice in the state right now is Jan Brewer, and she owes him BIG. 

She'll spend the next two years signing some of the biggest pieces of garbage to ever pass any legislature.

What could those bills look like?

...SB2001 - changing the state's motto from "Ditat Deus" to "Sieg Heil"

...SB2002 - the new state jobs program:  Anyone on any kind of public assistance has to serve time on a work gang at the border with Mexico, installing a line of kerosene-soaked crosses along the entire border

...SB2003 - the new state energy program:  Turn burning crosses at the border into power generation stations

...SB2004 - legalizing corporate sponsorship of government offices and facilities.  Look for the "Highground Inc. Foyer" on the 9th floor of the Executive Tower and the Corrections Corporation of America Senate Republican Caucus Room" shortly after the new lege is seated in January

---SCR2001 - Rescinding the Arizona Constitution in its entirety and seceding from the United States of America

...SB2101 - Making the act of asking one's employer for a raise a class six felony

...SCR2002 - Ending the constitutional requirements to have and support public education in Arizona

...SCR2003 - Specifying that eligibility for voting is confined to registered Republicans and to those who can pass a civics test - written in pig Latin

...SCR2004 - Specifying that English is the only language allowed to be spoken in Arizona.  Tourists and Natives not welcome

...SB2178 - A new "Employer Sanctions" bill, this one penalizing employers who pay their employees a livable wage and/or fringe benefits

...SB2255 - Specifying that presidential candidates on the AZ ballot cannot have skin any darker than Russell Pearce's after a day spent speechifyin' and back-slappin' at a tea party or neo-Nazi rally at the Capitol

...SB2284 - Requiring that members of the Senate from the minority caucus serve as the butlers and maids for the members of the majority caucus

...SCR2005 - Creating a special class of citizens called "corporations" and granting them tax-exempt status


Note: the above is thoroughgoing wiseass-ery.  None of the listed bills are real.

Yet.


Other lege-related notes:  Congratulations go out to LD17's own David Schapira, the newly-elected leader of the Democratic caucus in the state senate.  Senators Leah Landrum Taylor and Paula Aboud were elected as Assistant Minority Leader and Democratic Whip, respectively.

Ugh.

Chalk one up for the politics of demonization.  A big one...

Last night was definitely ugly.

Many good people, and at least one great one, lost their jobs last night.

The results page on the AZ Secretary of State's website is here.

First, the genuinely ugly - Harry Mitchell, the icon of public service, lost the CD5 race to real estate vulture David Schweikert.  Apparently, the majority of voters in CD5 have decided that they don't want a public servant to represent them in Congress, instead giving their nod to a public predator (geez, can ya tell I'm still pissed over this one? ).

The entire Schweikert campaign platform can be summed up thusly:  Obamacare!

Seriously, that was it. 

I was on sign detail for one of the down ballot candidates here, and every polling place had at least 5 - 8 little signs that had one word on them - "Obamacare."  Sometimes they were placed at random, sometimes they were placed next to Mitchell signs, and at least once, place *in* a Mitchell sign.

More on this race in the next few days, after I decompress.

...There was lots of bad (some really bad) on Tuesday.

- The Rs swept the statewide races.  Some of the D losses were expected, but to elect two people who have long records of being crooks to positions of great public trust like Attorney General and Treasurer?

As noted above, last night was a triumph of the politics of demonization, but "willful ignorance" also ran wild in Arizona on Tuesday.

- The Rs also increased their majority in the legislature, mostly by knocking off a number of Democratic women.

Former State Representative Jackie Thrasher (LD10) lost her bid to return to the House, down by almost 3000 votes.

State Representative Rae Waters (LD20) is down 1400 votes in her reelection bid.

State Senator Rebecca Rios (LD23)  is down almost 5000 votes her race.

State Representative Barbara McGuire (LD23) is down almost 7000 votes.

State Senator Amanda Aguirre (LD24) is down more than 3000 votes in her race.

State Representative Pat Fleming (LD25) is down more than 3000 votes.

State Representative Nancy Young Wright (LD26) is down slightly less than 900 votes in her race.

In keeping with the Rs' anti-woman theme, Dirty Scottsdale writer and "chip off the ol' potatoe" Ben Quayle won the CD3 seat being vacated by John Shadegg.  His opponent ran as a Republican dressed up in a Democrat's clothing.  Turns out that didn't inspire the D base to turn out.  Who knew?

The politics of demonization was effective on a number of ballot propositions, too.

Prop 106 (anti-healthcare reform), Prop 107 (anti-affirmative action), and Prop 113 (anti-union) were all approved by the voters.

...There were a few nuggets of good in yesterday's carnage.  OK, less "good" than "not horrificly bad" -

 - Prop 301 (ending and sweeping the monies from the Land Conservation Fund) and Prop 302 (ending First Things First, the early childhood education program that was created by the voters in a previous election) have been turned away by the voters.  The Rs in the lege will use this as a rationalization to further gut education and social infrastructure programs in the name of "balancing the budget," but they were going to that anyway.  They just would have found a different excuse if the Props had passed.

- In out-of-state results that may have a direct impact on Arizona, Kris Kobach, the nativist lawyer who wrote SB1070 for fellow traveller Russell Pearce, won his election as Secretary of State in Kansas.  He'll be overseeing elections there.  He ran on a anti-immigrant platform, and has pledged to work to minimize the number of immigrants voting there.  God help Kansas.  On the plus side, we can always hope that his duties/schemes in KS serve to distract him from Arizona.

- Also turned away were R challenges to U.S. Reps. Gabrielle Giffords (CD8) and Raul Grijalva (CD7) (however, CD8 remains close, so there is a chance that one will change, though Giffords is ahead by approximately 2000 votes as of this writing.)

- In my home LD, District 17, State Rep. David Schapira has fended off what had appeared to be a strong challenger for the LD17 Senate seat.  Wendy Rogers was touted as the kind of conservative who could win in a Democratic-leaning swing district.  Turns out she was actually just a polished version of her ticketmate, Don Hawker.  House candidate Hawker was the epitome of the "single issue" candidate, literally blaming all that ails Arizona (and the country) on abortion.

Both were wrong for the community, wrong for the district, and wrong for the state, and voters in D17 saw that.  One of the advantages of living in a district with a lot of university professors and students in it.

- In some of the down ballot races, there was some good news -

Retiring State Senator Meg Burton Cahill defeated a retired barber for the Justice of the Peace spot in the University Lakes Justice Precinct.  Some ugly robocalls funded by the Arizona Multihousing Association failed to defeat the popular Tempean.

Dana Saar of Fountain Hills defeated embarrassment Jerry Walker of Mesa for Walker's seat on the Governing Board of the Maricopa County Community College District.  Walker has shamed his constituents and the District a number of times with his thuggish behavior.  Saar taking the seat will help restore the credibility of this embattled board.


...The one spark of hope, in Arizona and across the nation, that I can find from yesterday's results (and I had to dig deep to find this one) -

In 1994, that national R wave occurred two years *after* redistricting took place.  

In 2010, the wave took place two years *before* redistricting.  The Rs, especially the tea baggers, won't have time to entrench themselves before having to run in radically different districts in 2012.

More later, on CD5 and some of the local races and ballot questions...

Didja hear??? There's an election tomorrow...

Who knew?!?

Seriously, the polling place locator function of the Maricopa County Recorder's website is here.

The polls here will be open from 6 a.m. until 7 p.m., and if you are in line by 7, you will get to vote.

The MSM isn't getting it...

Last weekend, Josh Brodesky wrote a piece for the Arizona Daily Star that excoriated blogs, particularly political blogs like Blog for Arizona (full disclosure: I'm a guest writer at BfA), for being biased and unprofessional.

Blogs? Biased and unprofessional? 

Blogs????


No sh!t, Sherlock.


To its credit, the Star has published the insightful response of Michael Bryan, the blog "owner" of BfA.

David Safier of Blog for Arizona has an equally insightful, and more direct, rebuttal of Brodesky's diatribe.

My take:

I started writing my own insightful and sharp response.  It was also long and boring, even pedantic.

That response has been deleted.

The bottom line is that blogs are exactly what the writers want them to be - outlets for partisan commentary, observations on life (or just a part of it), places to rant (this blog was started as a vent for all of the frustration that had built up from watching the insanity that is the Arizona political scene) or outlets for cooking tips or whatever.

While some, like this one, make occasional forays into areas that used to be the exclusive territory of "professional" media (covering public meetings and legislative developments), nearly all of us are more like columnists than street-level reporters.

Mr. Brodesky criticizes blogs, which he admits he doesn't read often, for not being like his newspaper, yet he doesn't even allude to the fact that many blogs break stories that MSM reporters don't want to touch (like David Safier's coverage of the misuse of tuition tax credit $), many times because of their own biases or even because they're afraid that writing something that could offend one of the people they need as a source.

Anyway, I can see that I'm already getting pedantic again, so let me close this with an open question for Mr. Brodesky and anyone else who cares to answer:

If the "traditional" media should be held up as an example of integrity and professionalism that all bloggers should aspire to (and be ashamed for not achieving), why is it that ABC News, ostensibly a mainstream media organization, has brought Andrew Breitbart on board to be part of their election coverage?

You know, the same Breitbart who selectively edited video to smear Shirley Sherrod, a career employee of the Department of Agriculture?

You know, the same Breitbart who seems to have done the same thing in Alaska over the weekend, editing a garbled recording of some reporters into a conspiracy against tea party/GOP Senate candidate Joe Miller?


I'm openly partisan, as are the other writers at BfA, as are the writers of the other political bloggers in AZ (left and right).

Most of us do NOT play with the facts.

Unlike folks like Andrew Breitbart, who is about to become part of Mr. Brodesky's mainstream media.