Keith Olbermann out at MSNBC

From Huffington Post -

Keith Olbermann and MSNBC have ended their contract, according to a statement from MSNBC. The last episode of "Countdown" will air this evening, Friday, January 21.


MSNBC's statement reads as follows:

MSNBC and Keith Olbermann have ended their contract. The last broadcast of "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" will be this evening. MSNBC thanks Keith for his integral role in MSNBC's success and we wish him well in his future endeavors.

This news is a little stunning, yet it isn't entirely surprising, given Comcast's recent takeover of MSNBC.  Guesses are that Rachel Maddow is next, but we'll see what happens in the coming days and weeks.

Later...

Arizona Democratic Party chair race: time to close ranks and unite

As most observers have probably already noted, I don't often write about the inner workings of the Arizona Democratic Party (or the Arizona Republican Party, for that matter), mostly because most readers find that kind of "inside baseball" stuff really boring.

Either they're insiders and know this stuff already, or they're not insiders and they don't care about it in the first place.

However, the current jockeying for the chairmanship of the Arizona Democratic Party has made it into the MSM, so the whole thing merits a temporary waiving of my personal policy in this regard.


Every two years, political parties in Arizona reorganize, choosing new leaders for the next election cycle, and that's where the Democrats and Republicans are right now, heading into Saturday's meetings of their respective State Committees.

I'll leave it to the various Republican bloggers to "discuss" what's going on in their party; suffice it to say that anyone that they choose to lead them for the next two years is someone that I'm going to disagree with, on pretty much all significant issues.

Two candidates for ADP chair have emerged - Rodney Glassman, the former Tucson City Council member and 2010 Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, and Andrei Cherny, the former White House staffer, Assistant Arizona Attorney General, and 2010 Democratic nominee for Arizona Treasurer.

Various pro and con factions have formed, and the "jockeying" has involved more than a few elbows being thrown.  The level of rancor has risen to the point where an email went out yesterday, signed by former Attorney General Terry Goddard and current Congressman Raul Grijalva, urging a one month delay in electing a new slate of officers.

I'm not sure I agree with that idea, but I undertstand it.  Discussion has become rancorous, and a lot of people are still reeling from the shootings in Tucson two weeks ago.  A month's delay may give time for everyone to calm down and to heal a little.

However, putting this off for a month may also give time for the current disagreements to grow into outright rifts.

As a member of the ADP's State Committee, I can state unequivocally that we've been buried in emails trumpeting this or that endorsement, and many of us are getting sick of the noise.

It's time to settle the matter, and regardless of how the votes tally, unite behind the new chair, whoever that might be.


Full disclosure time:  As a State Committee member, I will be voting tomorrow, and for a number of reasons, have decided to support Andrei Cherny.  He isn't a perfect candidate, but he is a *good* candidate, and even more importantly, he is the *better* candidate.

I've met both candidates, but don't know either one well, so I've relied on the impressions of friends of mine who do know one, the other, or both personally.

Everyone that I've spoken to has been impressed by Andrei's intellect and energy.  Everyone that I've spoken to about Rodney, especially the ones who worked on his campaign, are less complimentary of him.

Also impressive was Andrei's performance in a low-profile, downballot race. 

Many folks have focused on the ability to raise money, and to be sure, that is a very important ability in a state chair (and one that favors Cherny).

However, an even bigger part of a state chair's job is the ability to reach people, and Andrei did that almost 686K times, including winning his race in Pima County with over 151K votes.  Rodney also ran statewide, and received 592K votes.  He lost Pima County, receiving only 134K votes there.

Not only was that loss in Pima the first loss in a significant statewide race for a D in years, Pima is Rodney's home county. 

He couldn't even reach the people who know him best in an area that tends to vote for Democrats.

That doesn't bode well for what will happen if he is elected state chair.

I like Rodney, based on the few contacts that I've had with him, and I like a lot of his supporters, a few of whom are friends, but on this matter, I am in disagreement with those friends.

I fervently hope that regardless of how the vote goes tomorrow, all of the state's Democrats, friends and strangers alike, will be able to cast their differences aside and unite behind the new chair.

See you tomorrow at the Wyndham, BYOP*.

* - Bring Your Own Popcorn :))

Redistricting Update: Two Republican replacement nominees selected

The Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments selected Republicans Crystal Russell and Richard Stertz to replace two other Republicans who had been found ineligible for membership on the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC).

The Commission, per its legal duties, had forwarded the names or 10 Republicans, 10 Democrats, and 5 Independent applicants to the AIRC.  From that list, the leader of each caucus in each chamber will select one person to serve on the AIRC.  The four members so selected will then choose a fifth member from the list of Independents to act as chair of the AIRC (there are other possible variations based on the possiblity that one of the legislators could select someone not of their own party, but most observers consider that to be unlikely).

House Speaker Kirk Adams (R) and Senate President Russell Pearce (R) filed suit over the original list, claiming that three of the 25 names weren't eligible because they held public office.  Republicans Stephen Sossaman and Mark Schnepf were/are on irrigation district governing boards and Independent Paul Bender has served as a judge on a couple of tribal courts.  Many observers felt that Sossaman and Schnepf were "thrown under the bus" in order to mask the partisan nature of the attack on Bender's qualifications.  Bender is a law professor at ASU and a noted progressive.  He's also widely considered, even by his detractors, to be brilliant.

The Supreme Court agreed with Pearce and Adams regarding Sossaman and Schnepf, but found that Bender's offices with the courts of sovereign tribal nations didn't qualify as "public offices" under Arizona law.

The meeting went along pretty efficiently.  After some brief opening remarks, they immediately and unanimously decided to consider only the five applicants who were interviewed by the Commission but hadn't made it on to the original list of names sent to the leadership of the legislature.

There was concern expressed over the lack of geographic diversity among the nominees, and while the members of the Commission felt that they didn't do anything improper with the formation of the original list, the issue of geographic diversity was clearly on their minds as they proceeded.

After a motion to nominate Russell and Christopher Gleason as the two replacements, the Commission briefly went into executive session to discuss some legal advice.

After that session, the motion was amended to separate the nominations.

Russell was approved unanimously.  After discussion over the nature of some of Gleason's political ties, he was nominated.  His nomination failed by a 4 - 8 vote.

After that vote, Jeffrey Miller was nominated.  His nomination failed, also by a 4 - 8 vote.

The next name considered was Stertz, and his nomination passed by an 11 - 1 vote.

Chief Justice Rebecca White Berch thanked the Commission members for gathering together on such short notice and adjourned the meeting, less than an hour after it began.

Now, let the four-way chess match begin, and a chess match it will be because each selection by a leader of the legislature will constrain the selections that follow.

Later...

R response to the furor over legislators illegally carrying guns at the legislature: Make it legal

One of the interesting tidbits arising from the opening of the legislature last week was the story of a number of legislators carrying firearms with them on the floors of each chamber.  One of them, Sen. Lori Klein, later confirmed to me (and others) that she had a gun with her both in the Senate and in the House when she attended the Governor's speech that day.

While some might attribute this turn of events to the recent shooting in Tucson, where six people were killed and more than another dozen were wounded, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, but a gunman who attacked a "Congress On Your Corner" gathering, this is hardly the first time in recent memory that a legislator has bragged about "packin' heat" at the Capitol, usually followed a by a statement in a belief that legislators are exempt from the law.

Anyway, after the shootings and the p.r. mess that was the opening of the legislature, the Republicans resisted any efforts to pass sensible firearms safety laws, preferring instead to maintain their embrace of the gun fetishists.

And now, they've doubled down on the insanity.

Sen. Ron Gould has introduced, with "luminaries" such as Sen. Russell Pearce, Sen. Rick Murphy, Rep. Carl Seel, Rep. Jack Harper, and others signed on as sponsors/cosponsors, SB1201.

It's rather innocuously labelled "firearms omnibus," but it is anything but innocuous.

If enacted, it would -

- Remove the section of the law (ARS 13-3102) that makes entering a goverment building while possessing a firearm a crime

- Changes the section of the law (ARS 13-3107) regarding the unlawful discharge of firearms by replacing "with criminal negligence" to "knowing" in the definition

- Removes the provision in the same section as above that allows local police chiefs to evaluate and set policy in "hunting areas" within their jurisdiction

- Changes the law (ARS 13-3108) to disallow the state or any of its agencies from enacting a "rule or ordinance" relating to firearms, with certain exceptions, and GREATLY restricts those exceptions


People in other parts of the country hear talk about the "nuts" in Arizona, and they think we are talking only about people like Jared Loughner.

They have no clue about the cultural insanity here that enables people like Loughner.


Given the timing of this, as in how long it takes to get a bill idea through the Legislative Council and turned into an actual bill, did Gould et. al. even wait for the end of the funerals in Tucson before spawning this abomination?

Redistricting update: Friday meeting to select two more Republican nominees for the Independent Redistricting Commission

From the just-released meeting notice for the Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments, the group that screens the applicants for the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) -

NOTICE OF EMERGENCY MEETING


The Commission on Appellate Court Appointments will hold an emergency meeting at 11:30 a.m. on January 21, 2011, to identify two eligible individuals from the Republican candidates for nomination to the Independent Redistricting Commission, as ordered by the Arizona Supreme Court in its Order filed January 19, 2011, in No. CV-10-0405-SA.

The meeting is open to the public. Citizens may address the commission at 11:30 a.m. on January 21, 2011. Public comment cannot be accepted after the 11:30 a.m. hearing on January 21. The meeting will be held in Phoenix in Room 345 of the Arizona State Courts Building, 1501 West Washington.

The agenda may be obtained from the Human Resources Division, Administrative Office of the Courts, 1501 West Washington, Suite 221, Phoenix, Arizona, 85007; by calling (602) 452-3311; or at the Commission=s website at http://www.arizona-redistrictingnominations.com/.

Note:  The chair of the Appellate Court Appointments Commission is Chief Justice Rebecca White Berch, and historically, when one of her meetings has a specified start time, she starts the meeting at that time.  If you plan on attending, be in your seat by 11:29 a.m. or you will miss something significant.

Later...

David Schweikert's vote to repeal health care reform: Impacts on his "constituents"

Yesterday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 2, a bill to repeal last year's health care reform legislation, by a vote of 245 - 189.  All Republicans, including AZCD5's David Schweikert, voted in favor of the bill.

The bill, the debate, and the vote were a triumph of ideology over reality, because if health care reform is repealed, it will increase the federal deficit and harm people all over the country, including thousands here in CD5.

From the Minority Staff of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce -

This analysis describes the impact of repeal of the Affordable Care Act in the 5th Congressional District of Arizona, which is represented by Rep. David Schweikert. It finds that repeal of the health reform law would have significant consequences in the district by:


Allowing insurance companies to deny coverage to 122,000 to 320,000 individuals, including 8,000 to 36,000 children, with pre-existing conditions.

Rescinding consumer protections for 469,000 individuals who have health insurance through their employer or the market for private insurance.

Eliminating health care tax credits for up to 15,700 small businesses and 143,000 families.

Increasing prescription drug costs for 10,100 seniors who hit the Part D drug “donut hole” and denying new preventive care benefits to 84,000 seniors.

Increasing the costs of early retiree coverage for up to 11,600 early retirees.

Eliminating new health care coverage options for 4,000 uninsured young adults.

Increasing the number of people without health insurance by 43,000 individuals.

Increasing the costs to hospitals of providing uncompensated care by $50 million annually.

Repeal of Protections Against Insurance Company Abuses

Repeal would eliminate the ban on discrimination on the basis of pre-existing conditions. Under the health reform law, insurance companies can no longer deny coverage to children with pre-existing conditions and will be banned from discriminating against adults with pre-existing conditions in 2014. There are 122,000 to 320,000 residents in Rep. Schweikert’s district with pre-existing conditions like diabetes, heart disease, or cancer, including 8,000 to 36,000 children. Repeal would allow insurance companies to refuse to insure these individuals if they seek coverage in the individual or small-group markets. The consequences would be particularly acute for the 18,000 to 48,000 individuals in the district who currently lack insurance coverage and who would be unable to purchase individual policies if the law is repealed.

Repeal would eliminate the ban on annual and lifetime limits. The health reform law prohibits insurance companies from imposing annual and lifetime limits on health insurance coverage. This provision protects the rights of everyone who receives coverage from their employer or through the market for private insurance. If this protection is repealed, insurers would be able to impose coverage limits on 469,000 individuals in the district with employer or private coverage.

Repeal would eliminate the ban on rescissions. The health reform law prohibits insurers from rescinding coverage for individuals who become ill. Repeal would allow insurance companies to resume the practice of rescinding coverage for the 48,000 district residents who purchase individual health insurance.

Repeal would eliminate other consumer protections. The health reform law protects individuals from soaring insurance costs by requiring reviews of proposed rate increases and limiting the amount insurance companies can spend on administrative expenses, profits, and other overhead. Repeal would deny these new protections to tens of thousands of district residents who either buy their own insurance or receive coverage through employers who do not self-insure.

Repeal of Benefits for Individuals and Families

Repeal would eliminate the requirement that insurance companies provide free preventive care. The health reform law promotes wellness by requiring insurance companies to offer free preventive care as part of any new or revised policies they issue after September 23, 2010. Repeal would allow insurance companies to charge for these essential benefits, which would increase out-of-pocket costs for 98,000 district residents.

Repeal would eliminate health insurance options for young adults. The health reform law allows young adults to remain on their parents’ insurance policies up to age 26. In Rep. Schweikert’s district, 4,000 young adults have or are expected to take advantage of this benefit. Repeal would force these young adults to find other coverage or return to the ranks of the uninsured.

Repeal would eliminate tax credits for buying health insurance. Starting in 2014, the health reform law gives middle class families the largest tax cut for health care in history, providing tax credits to buy coverage for families with incomes up to $88,000 for a family of four. Repeal would deny these credits to 143,000 families in the district.

Repeal would increase the number of uninsured. When fully implemented, the health reform law will extend coverage to 94% of all Americans. If this level of coverage is reached in the district, 43,000 residents who currently do not have health insurance will receive coverage. Repeal would mean these residents would lose their health insurance.

Repeal of Benefits for Seniors

Repeal would increase drug costs for seniors. Beginning in 2011, the health reform law provides a 50% discount for prescription drugs for Medicare beneficiaries who enter the Medicare Part D “donut hole” and lose coverage for their drug expenses. The law then increases the discount to Medicare beneficiaries each year until 2020, when the donut hole is finally eliminated. There are 10,100 Medicare beneficiaries in Rep. Schweikert’s district who are expected to benefit from these provisions. Repeal would increase the average cost of prescription drugs for these Medicare beneficiaries by over $500 in 2011 and by over $3,000 in 2020.

Repeal would deny seniors new preventive care and other benefits. The health reform law improves Medicare by providing free preventive and wellness care, improving primary and coordinated care, and enhancing nursing home care. The law also strengthens the Medicare trust fund, extending its solvency from 2017 to 2029. Repeal would eliminate these benefits for 84,000 Medicare beneficiaries in the district and cause the Medicare trust fund to become insolvent in just six years.

Repeal of Benefits for Small and Large Businesses and Health Care Providers

Repeal would eliminate tax credits for small businesses. The health reform law provides tax credits to small businesses worth up to 35% of the cost of providing health insurance. There are up to 15,700 small businesses in Rep. Schweikert’s district that are eligible for this tax credit. Repeal would force these small businesses to drop coverage or bear the full costs of coverage themselves.

Repeal would increase retiree health care costs for employers. The health reform law provides funding to encourage employers to continue to provide health insurance for their retirees. As many as 11,600 district residents who have retired but are not yet eligible for Medicare could ultimately benefit from this early retiree assistance. Repeal would increase costs for employers and jeopardize the coverage their retirees are receiving.

Repeal would increase the cost of uncompensated care born by hospitals. The health reform law benefits hospitals by covering more Americans and thereby reducing the cost of providing care to the uninsured. Repeal would undo this benefit, increasing the cost of uncompensated care by $50 million annually for hospitals in the district.

Repeal of Benefits for Taxpayers

Repeal would increase the long-term debt by over $1 trillion. The health reform law reduces the nation’s debt by eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse in the health care system, reducing the growth of health care costs, and preventing excessive profit-taking by private insurers. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the bill will reduce the deficit by over $200 billion over the next ten years and by over a trillion dollars in the decade after that. Repeal would eliminate these cost-cutting measures, adding more than $3,000 to the national debt for each American, including the 680,000 residents of the district.

Of course, while Schweikert has enthusiastically worked to reduce his constituents and their families' access to health care, he has no problem accepting taxpayer-funded healthcare coverage for himself and his family, nor does he have a problem with shielding from public scrutiny the members of his own caucus who have done the same.
 
 

Special session: they've got this train running at full speed

...and they're aiming at the state's most vulnerable residents...


Wednesday afternoon, the Arizona Legislature convened a special session in order to pass bills related to Governor Jan Brewer's plan to kick 280,000 people off of AHCCCS.

The first order of business was to declare an "emergency" and suspend the rules related to things like public notice of committee agendas and time requirements.

Under normal conditions, it takes at least three days minimum to pass a bill.  However, with the rules suspended, bills can be passed in one day.  However, they're taking two for this special session.
Matching bills were "read" ("introduced") in each chamber of the legislature today and went through committee hearings in both chambers.

The bills are SB1001 and HB2001.

The bills will pass, one will be substituted for the other (a parliamentary procedure to speed up the process) and will be forwarded to the Governor, who will then have permission to ask the feds for an eligibility waiver to cut the number of people on AHCCCS.

The expectation around the Capitol is that the feds will say "NO!" but even in the unlikely event that federal permission is forthcoming, with voter approval of 2000's Prop 204 (setting eligibility at 100% of the federal poverty level), the legislature cannot adjust AHCCCS eligibility without voter approval.

Bills, HCR2001 and HCR2002, were introduced to amend the Arizona Constitution to bar the voters from ever expanding AHCCCS coverage again.  If either was passed, it would have mandated a special election on May 17, 2011.

Both were introduced by Rep. Jack Harper (R-Surprise!), but neither one was heard in committee, so they are probably dead for now.

Other bills that were introduced for the special session but not heard in committee -

HB2002 (Harper) and SB1002 (Schapira, Sinema, Tovar) would have changed what sort of organ transplants are covered by AHCCCS.  Republican Harper's bill would have made the change conditional upon voter approval of his amendment to the AZ Constitution; the bill proposed by Democrats Schapira, Sinema, and Tovar has no such conditional enactment clause, but did include an emergency clause for immediate enactment.

Sinema also introduced SB1003 and SB1004.  SB1003 was basically the same as SB1002, while SB1004 would have repealed a specific tax credit and directed the revenue toward paying for AHCCCS transplants.

This special session should be over by around 2:30 p.m. on Thursday, just in time for the legislators to head home for the weekend on their normal schedule.

The other bills...OK, the amendment to the AZ Constitution/special election...can wait until a later special session if the feds throw everyone a curveball and actually give the Governor permission to kick the poorest Arizonans off of AHCCCS.  The word is that another special session will be called by the end of the month, one relating to tax cuts for business, masquerading as "economic development."

Stay tuned...

Live blogging Senate Appropriations - special session

2:39 p.m. - Special session SB1001 passes 9 - 4.  Biggs announces vote and adjourns meeting in same breath.

2:38 p.m. - Biggs wonders if state will have to "emasculate" education to fund AHCCCS.

2:36 p.m. - Allen votes yes.  Biggs says bill generates needed "discussion".  Says that lawsuits will follow.

2:35 p.m. - Sylvia Allen says that they should be allowed to reform all programs to balance budget.

2:34 p.m. - Sinema votes no.

2:30 p.m. - Sinema points out that even a federal waiver won't override Prop 204, which expanded AHCCCS eligibility to 100% of the federal property level.

2:29 p.m. - Biggs hurrying Schapira.  Schapira votes no.

2:26 - Schapira - Preventative care is better and cheaper than treatment, and this will increase indigent treatment costs, possibly more than is saved.

2:24 p.m. - Schapira call this a "poor policy" with likely negative business and economic impacts on the state.

2:23 - Aboud (D) voting no.  Calls out Republicans for protecting wealthy and corps while targeting poor..  Calls bill a "half-hearted" publicity stunt.

2:21 p.m. - Rs all voting yes.  What a shock.

2:18 p.m. - Sen. Andy Biggs gavelled meeting into session.  Democrats walking in as voting starts.

Live blogging the start of the first special session of the year...

...and expect plenty more, with another one possible by the end of the month...

2:10 p.m. - Heading to the meeting of Senate Appropriations

2:08 p.m. - Introducing doctor of the day, somebody from Mesa.

2:07 p.m. - SB1001, SB1002 referred to committees

2:02 p.m. - Notifying House that they are ready to conduct business/this train.

2:00 p.m. - Rules suspended so it won't take three days to railroad this through.

1:58 p.m. - Reading proclamation for special session.

1:56 p.m. - Gavelled into session.  Prayer, pledge, taking attendance.

Redistricting update: Consider the hair successfully split

The Arizona Supreme Court has handed down its ruling in the Pearce/Adams lawsuit challenging the eligibility of three of the nominees for the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC).

The suit was partially successful - the Court ruled that Republicans Stephen Sossaman and Mark Schnepf are ineligible because of their service on irrigation district governing boards and the Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments must select two more Republican applicants for Arizona Senate President Russell Pearce and Arizona House Speaker Kirk Adams to add to the list of names from which the electeds will make their appointments to the AIRC.  The Court ordered that the two names be selected and forwarded to the electeds by January 31, 2011.

On the other hand, the Court ruled that Professor Paul Bender's service on tribal courts does *not* violate the "no public officers" clause in the law that created the AIRC, and he remains on the list of Independent candidates for the AIRC.

More later...

Legislative Loon Award: Retired

...at least for two years...

Not because of recent calls for a civil discourse that is more "civil" but because there are too many candidates to choose from, and there will be until the next election (at least!).

Here we are, only into the 2nd week of the legislative session, and 564 bills have been proposed in the House, and another 186 in the Senate.  Highlights include, but are not limited to, the following bills -

HB2001, Rep. Jack Harper's move to turn college classrooms into armed encampments

HB2006, Harper's scheme to allow firearms within game refuges

HB2070, Harper's establishment of a state-sanctioned vigilante force to hunt brown-skinned people near the border with Mexico

HB2077, Rep. Chester Crandell's proposal to require federal agencies to register with the sheriff of any county they operate in, pay a fee, and forward any fees/fines/penalties that they collect to that sheriff for forwarding to the state's General Fund

HB2179, Rep. Carl Seel's plan to require school districts to identify students of parents whose immigration status is undocumented and report the numbers to the state.  It also has criminal and financial penalties for inaccuracies

HB2182, Seel's plan for screwing over teachers by allowing districts to withhold contract offers until July 1 of each year

HB2221, Rep. John Fillmore's bill to put the state in the banking business.  Seriously.  It would mandate the creation of a state-operated bank, accepting deposits and making loans.  Guaranteed by the state's General Fund

HB2222, Fillmore's plan to take the limits off of school tuition tax credits

HB2288, Rep. Jeff Dial's move to require the state's airports to abandon the Transportation Security Administration and hire private security contractors to handle all aspects of airport security

HB2313, Rep. Russ Jones' proposal to allow taking, under eminent domain, of federally-owned land

HB2333, Harper's move to allow former legislators to immediately become professional lobbyists (currently, they have to wait a year)

HB2337, Rep. Justin Olson's proposal to require school districts that still offer full-day K to charge tuition for a half day of that full day

HB2340, Olson's proposal to end the state's equalization property tax (which goes directly to fund education)

HB2472, Another "eminent domain of federal land" bill, this one from Rep. David Gowan

HB2479, a "guns in schools" bill, from Gowan

HB2505, Seel's (and Sen. Russell Pearce's) scheme to cut state education aid to school districts for students whose parents cannot prove their child's immigration status

HCR2011, Seel's proposed amendment to the AZ Constitution to reduce the income eligibility level for AHCCCS

HCR2023, Rep. David Burnell Smith's plan to allow wealthy candidates to skip the bother of talking to voters and gathering nominating signatures in lieu of buying their way onto the ballot

HCR2024, Smith's proposed amendment to the AZ Constitution to end Clean Elections.  Smith was the first legislator removed from office due to violations of Clean Elections' rules.  Think he's still holding a grudge?  Naaahhhhh...couldn't be!  :)

SCR1010, Sen. Linda Gray's proposed amendment to the AZ Constitution to bar state courts from considering the "legal precepts of other nations or cultures" when rendering their decisions.

This isn't meant to be a comprehensive listing of bad bills proposed so far (there are some anti-choice and anti-immigrant bills, but I don't have time to cover them right now - and we haven't seen the "birther" or 14th Amendment stuff yet), but this is just a good start at documenting the beginning of what is shaping up to be an ugly year.

That didn't take long - 1st Special Session of the 50th Arizona Legislature on tap for Wednesday

The Governor has called a special session of the legislature for Wednesday at 1:45 p.m.

Purpose:  To petition the federal government for permission to kick 280,000 people off of Medicaid (AHCCCS in Arizona)

One thing can be said about Arizona -

There will never be a dearth of subject material for political writers.

Redistricting update: Lawsuit argued, under advisement

Earlier today, the Arizona Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the suit over the nominees for the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) brought by Russell Pearce and Kirk Adams, President of the Arizona Senate and Speaker of the Arizona House, respectively.

The suit basically focuses on Pearce and Adams' allegation that three of the nominees for the AIRC, Independent Paul Bender and Republicans Steve Sossaman and Mark Schnepf, aren't eligible for the AIRC because of they hold public offices.  Bender has acted as a tribal judge for two Nations in Arizona and Sossaman and Schnepf have been elected to local irrigation district governing boards.

After slightly more than an hour, the Court took the matter under advisement and promised a ruling on the matter shortly (my guess: this week.  That's only a guess, however).

The Court was presided over by Vice Chief Justice Andrew Hurwitz as Chief Justice Rebecca White Berch recused herself because she chaired the meetings of the Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments that produced the list of applicants that Pearce and Adams dislike so much.  Judge Michael Ryan of Maricopa County sat in on the hearing in Berch's place.

It would be beyond my capabilities to write an exhaustive summary of the arguments presented today, but interested readers can find the written briefs here.

A less-than-exhaustive summary:

Peter Gentala, arguing for Pearce and Adams and targeting the nomination of ASU professor Paul Bender, basically argued that Native American tribes in Arizona are part of the state, and tribal offices qualify as public offices in Arizona.  He also argued that irrigation district board members are public officials even though they aren't specified as such under AZ law or in the materials published by the Appellate Court Appointments Commission (targeting the nominations of Schnepf and Sossaman).

The justices asked Gentala about whether irrigation district governing board members have to file the same financial disclosure forms that public officials have to (Gentala didn't know, and I don't either.  I've looked online and couldn't find any with the state or Maricopa County, nor could I find any campaign filings, but that doesn't mean they don't exist).  One justice, W. Scott Bailes, pointed out that tribal lands aren't considered "public."  Just ask anyone who has been caught hiking or camping on one or another reservation. 

Steven Tully, representing the five Republican Congressmen, argued in pretty much the same vein at Gentala.  He argued that Bender has admitted that he's a public official with the tribes and is ineligible for that reason.  Justice Hurwitz reiterated the "tribal v. public" lands point and also pointed out a case where tribal records are NOT public under Arizona's public records law.

Jack Fields, Deputy Yavapai County Attorney, representing Yavapai County Attorney Sheila Polk, questioned the lack of geographical diversity of the nominees (out of 10 R candidates, nine are from Maricopa County).

Mary O'Grady, representing the Arizona Attorney General, in turn representing the Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments, argued that it was too soon to challenge the qualifications of the three, and that it should have been done *after* one (or all three) were actually members of the AIRC (referred to as a "quo warranto" action).

Stanley Feldman, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, argued on behalf of Lattie Coor, Paul Johnson, et. al., who weighed in in support of Professor Bender.  He conceded the point that Bender is a public official in a tribe, but that sovereign Indian tribes aren't controlled by Arizona law, nor are tribal officials' appointments/elections governed by Arizona law.  He did *not* agree with O'Grady's argument regarding the qualifications issue.  He stated that waiting until it is time for a "quo warranto" action (after the membership of the AIRC is appointed) isn't wise, saying "[i]t's here, you are going to have to decide it sooner or later."

I truly don't have any idea how the Court will rule on this matter.  I'm not familiar with the dynamic of the Court.  On the west side of Wesley Bolin Plaza (aka - at the legislature), this would be an easy prediction to make - whatever is the worst possible outcome for Arizona, the lege would produce.

The Court, however, has a pretty good reputation for fairness.  They are expected to rule on the legal merits, and not being a lawyer, I can't evaluate those.

The logic here is apparent - the lawsuit is meritless, and Pearce and Adams are throwing Sossaman and Schnepf under the bus to create a smokescreen around their attempt to remove Bender who, while almost universally renowned as a brilliant legal scholar, is also widely regarded as a true liberal.

However, frequently the law has nothing more than a passing relationship with logic.

The video archive of today's arguments can be found here.  Click on the "Oral Arguments" for "ADAMS/PEARCE v. COMMISSION ON APPELLATE COURT APPOINTMENTS".


I do have one question however, one that didn't get brought up during today's hearing -

If Russell Pearce feels so strongly that Native American nations are so much a part of Arizona that their offices constitute public offices in Arizona, why is he a cosponsor of SCR1010, a proposed amendment to the Arizona Constitution to restrict the decisions of the state's courts?

From the proposal -

THE COURTS SHALL NOT LOOK TO THE LEGAL PRECEPTS OF OTHER NATIONS OR CULTURES

Just sayin'...

Statements from candidates running to be officers of the Arizona Democratic Party

Note: In this post, as well as the others in this series, where the letters included contact info (address, phone numbers, email addresses), that contact info has been removed.  That info is still available in the source letters.

Yet more candidate statements, this time for the candidates running for one of the three Vice Chairman spots:

Letter from Chris Campas, candidate for the office of Vice Chairman



RE: Vice-Chairman or First Vice-Chairman


11 JANUARY 2011


Dear State Committee Member,


I am energized and ready to go. There is much to do and I am eager to continue to serve on the Executive Board.


As Vice-Chairman, my first commitment is to the long-term success of the Arizona Democratic Party. I think we must make a deliberate and aggressive effort to find a democrat for every office which appears on the ballot. We must begin with Precinct Committeemen—we must work hard to engage and utilize our current PCs and recruit and train new PCs. We must target non-partisan races in every community: city council, school board, college districts, fire districts, hospital districts, etc. We must search for the best and brightest people in our state and we must provide them with the resources necessary to succeed in Arizona politics.


The ADP is in need of soul searching. Arizona confronts many civil rights challenges and the party must take the lead in demanding fair treatment for Arizona’s minorities. Aggressive outreach to the Hispanic community is essential to the long-term success of the ADP. Tribal nations too are a crucial demographic and deserve special attention and resources. It is our responsibility to reach out to every community, and offer warmth, acceptance and support to all those seeking to advance the democratic cause.


The ADP must establish clear goals as we move forward to 2012. We must commit to running three democrats in every Legislative District. We must commit to winning a majority of Arizona’s Congressional delegation. We must defeat Jon Kyl, and send a Democrat to represent Arizona in the United States Senate. We must not compromise on these goals.


First Vice-Chairman serves the dual position of National Committeeman. I fulfill three affirmative action goals: I am a young, gay, Hispanic. These three communities are at present entirely absent from our representation to the national party. If a woman is elected Chair, and the gender of the First Vice-Chair changes, I a prepared to assume the additional leadership requirements and provide representation to Democratic National Committee.


I am proud to be an Arizona Democrat; I am eager to continue my work on the Executive Board. WE CAN AND MUST TURN ARIZONA FOREVER BLUE IN 2012!!!


Your partner in peace,


Christopher T. Campas


Letter from Matt Capalby, candidate for the office of Vice Chairman



Dear Friends,


During these tumultuous times, it is imperative that we have the most experienced, capable and committed individuals leading our party. With this said and my twenty years of grassroots involvement with the Arizona Democratic Party, fighting for labor, our veterans, the marginalized and championing environmental issues; I once again ask for your support to serve as your Vice Chairman of the Arizona Democratic Party.


I have had the pleasure of knowing many of you over the years and it has been an honor to work with you through victories and defeats. For those that do not know me, I am a third generation and proud Arizonan. I am a military veteran, labor member and former member of the Governor Napolitano's Administration, serving to protect our State's environment with the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality. Being from Northern Arizona, I believe I have the


perspective necessary to address the concerns of both the metropolitan and rural areas of our state.


As the state party faces unprecedented challenges, we must work to reform and adapt to the rapidly changing political landscape that is Arizona. We can no longer work to reflect public opinion and "go with the flow" but we must work to mold and lead public opinion. Though we know that our core values and principles are more in keeping with those of Arizona's families than the Republicans anti-social/radical agenda, we have not been able to adequately sway the hearts and minds of Arizonans to our side.


Subsequently, in working with our new Chair and executive committee, I will work to propose appropriate changes to our business plan so we can more effectively convey our message and turn the tide of public opinion and voter support our way.


I ask for your support as Vice-Chairman, so we can redevelop and refocus our efforts on the success of our party and of our state. Thank you and God bless us all during these troubling times.


Best Wishes,


Matthew Capalby


Letter from Michael Gordy, candidate for the office of Vice Chair

Vote for Michael Gordy - ADP 2nd Vice Chair; a voice for and an ear to all counties. Thank you, Michael


Dear State Committeeperson,


I’m Michael Gordy, a retired middle school teacher. I’ve lived in Tucson since 1974. I ask for your support and your vote for the position of one of the 2nd vice chairs of the Arizona Democratic Party.


The events of the last week have further convinced me that we, as leaders of our party, need to reach out to our fellow Democrats and to all Arizonans to change not only our message but the tone of political discourse as well. The irony is that Gabby is one of our most inclusive leaders. And we need to follow her example to see each individual for their potential contribution to our state and party, not for how we differ.


I ask for your ideas, energy and support as we reaffirm our values as Democrats which include: empathy rather than sympathy, open discourse instead of secrecy, listening to other points of view, not waiting for “words from the top”….


We need you to be an active participant in transforming our state. I need you to be part of what WE do to make change happen. That’s why I’m proud to be a Democrat.


I believe that together we can change our party and if we work hard enough, reverse some of the damage the Republican majority has inflicted on our fellow Arizonans.


If you are willing, I need your help. If I am able, I’ll help you in any way I can.


Please, call or email with any ideas, strategies or even wild dreams about how we can make this happen.


Thank you.


Michael Gordy, elected as PC 108


Candidate for 2nd Vice Chair, Arizona Democratic Party
“Nonviolence is the answer to the crucial political and moral questions of our time: the need for man to overcome oppression and violence without resorting to oppression and violence. Man must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love."


Martin Luther King, Jr., Nobel Prize acceptance speech, Stockholm, 12/11/1964
 

Statements from candidates running to be officers of the Arizona Democratic Party

Still more candidate statements, this time from the candidates running for one of the three Vice Chairwoman spots:

Letter from Sherry B. Williams, candidate for the office of Vice Chairwoman



Date: January 12, 2011


From: Sherry B. Williams, Candidate for Vice Chairwoman


To: Awesome State Committee Persons of the Arizona Democratic Party,


I am a lifelong Democrat and have been active in campaigns, elections and registering voters in large numbers in Georgia, North Carolina, Illinois and Arizona. As an undergraduate, I was a Congressional Intern on Capitol Hill in 1979. I have attended three Democratic National Conventions: Atlanta in 1988, New York in 1992 (as an elected Illinois Delegate), and Chicago in 1996.


In Arizona since 2001, I have worked on numerous campaigns including Gore & Kerry and was just re-elected PC, State Committee woman and 2nd Vice Chair in LD 15 for the next 2 years. I am a member of the Phoenix Women’s Commission and several local and national organizations. I have helped ADP with many fair booths, parades, workshops and meetings.


From 2008 until filing to run for office in 2010, I worked at ADP headquarters as the Administrative Assistant at the front desk always excited to welcome you and take your phone


calls. I continued to work in the community while registering voters, signing up PEVL voters, and inviting these voters to become active in their legislative district.


In 2010, I was a candidate for Clerk of the Superior Court of Maricopa County. Despite having a great volunteer team, Party support, and 339,549 votes (38%), I lost to the 13-year Republican incumbent. I am humbled by the support I received from PCs and SCMs from all over Arizona.


As a small business owner for 15 years and an employee for several Fortune 100 companies, I have kept my focus and efforts serving in the trenches of my diverse communities. I even served with Michelle Obama on the Blue Gargoyle Adult Literacy Board when I lived in Chicago.


As I look forward to 2012, I will help mobilize, energize and inspire more voters and donors to “run with us” to victory. My motto is “Working Together: All Will Be Well in 2012”. The capitol of Arizona is Phoenix, so let’s rise from the ashes in 2012! We can do it!


I am running for Vice Chairwoman because I have the unique political, business, and grass roots experience needed to better serve our unique demographics. I would be honored to serve as one of three Vice Chairwomen utilizing my BIG vision, contagious hope, winning strategies, and cohesive teamwork with our new Executive Board. I am energized, excited and ready to work to move AZ toward victories in 2012.


From the bottom of a grateful heart, I appreciate all you have done as PCs and State Committee persons to support ADP. Now I ask for your vote on Saturday, January 22, 2011.


Sincerely,


Sherry B. Williams
 
 
Letter from Laura Hogan, candidate for the office of Vice Chairwoman To my Democratic Brothers and Sisters,



Thank you all for your commitment to the Democratic Party as a State Committee member. I admire all of you for your willingness to share your time, ideas and energy with your fellow Democrats to make our state a better place to live.


Without a doubt we have our work cut out for us through the next two years. I am asking for your vote of confidence to serve you during that time as one of the female Vice-Chairs on the State Executive Committee for the next two years. I ask for your consideration of my candidacy on two levels


a.


My experience and commitment to the Arizona Democratic Party (ADP)for the last ten years as an activist, volunteer, and donor and


b.


The perspective, knowledge and energy I would bring to the table as a member of the ADP Executive Committee for the next two years.


As the daughter of a teacher and an IBEW electrician, the wife of a Steelworker and a union member myself, my knowledge and experience in the labor movement will continue to be an asset to the Party and to my fellow Democrats.


I have served the Democratic Party in Arizona as a volunteer, a donor and an active committee member. I was elected in 2004 and 2006 to serve as District Chair in Legislative District 30. During that time I learned the importance of working within the rules but outside of the box when necessary to reach my desired goals. In the very diverse District 30 I found it valuable to work with the various area clubs to supplement and amplify the work of the District Committee to achieve the goals of the entire District.


I have served on the Strategic Planning Committee for the Pima County Democratic Party, the 2008 ADP Platform Committee and am a current member of the ADP Resolutions Committee. In those positions I have witnessed the growth of the infrastructure and resources available to Democrats on both the County and the State levels. While I have never seen a perfect coordinated campaign, I have seen the Arizona Democratic Party grow with each campaign. It is my goal to be a part of the continued progress of the Party developing a stronger message, bringing more people to the table, developing stronger grass roots ties and empowering individual activist and PC’s to take the Democratic message to their neighborhoods or constituent communities.


The by-laws simply state, “All Vice-Chairpersons shall perform such duties as are assigned to them by the state chair.” I commit to you that in addition to those duties as assigned, if I am elected as one of the Vice Chairs, I will serve as a communicator, taking the message from the grassroots in my area to the Executive Committee and bringing the news of the Executive Committee activities back to the grassroots. It is also my intention to serve the full two years of my term if I am elected.


I thank you for your service and respectfully ask for your vote for one of the Vice-Chairs of the Arizona Democratic Party.


In Solidarity,


Laura Hogan, State Committee Member


District 30, Pima County



Letter from Jo Kelleher, candidate for the office of Vice Chairwoman


Hello Fellow State Committeepersons:


I am ready to serve another term as your ADP Vice-chairwoman. I have thoroughly enjoyed my past two terms working to strengthen the Democratic Party in Arizona, and look forward to continuing to fight for Democratic values. Below are some of my accomplishments and my ideas for our next two years.


Accomplishments:


•Vice-chairwoman, ADP: 2007 – 2010


􀀹ADP trainer for candidate recruitment, headquarters management, education and communication – Yavapai, Navajo, Mohave, Maricopa Counties


􀀹Member of informal “Reform Group” promoting improved communication and decision – sharing within ADP


􀀹Chair of Bylaws Committee: 2009 – present


􀀹State Senate Candidate: 2006


•Vice-chair for Education and Communication, Yavapai County Democratic Party: 2007- present


􀀹County Party website and newsletter


􀀹Organized candidate events for 2010 campaign


􀀹Headquarters manager and volunteer


•Chino Valley Unified School District Governing Board member, currently Vice-chair


Ideas for 2011-2012


•Work hard to bring back, support, and nurture our outstanding 2010 Democratic State-wide candidates and LD candidates for the 2012 and 2014 elections.


•Continue to strengthen communication and collaborative decision-making in the Party.


•Continue to broaden our fiscal resources – recruiting new large donors and encouraging small donors.


•Develop a Policy and Procedures Manual for both staff and officers that is current and dynamic.


•Continue to pursue broad, state-wide media coverage by challenging Republican mismanagement and lack of leadership and promoting Democratic solutions.