Pardon my cynicism, but another mass shooting (in an elementary school this time) and another call by certain folks to turn schools and the rest of society into an armed encampment?
Must be a day ending in "y"...
There are people who are writing about this far more eloquently, far more heart-wrenchingly, than I can.
All I can ask is the same question that I asked in the aftermath of the movie theater shooting -
What's the magic number?
How much blood has to be spilled before mindless rhetoric takes a back seat to reasoned discussion? How many innocent people must die before our elected "leaders" stop quaking in fear of/sucking up to the gun industry and its lobbyists/cheerleaders at the NRA?
A couple of observations:
1. The people who argue that the best way to prevent gun violence in schools is to arm teachers have as much credibility as someone who says that the best way to prevent drug use in schools is to require that meth is on the school cafeteria menu.
2. Wouldn't it be ironic if the gun fetishists'/enthusiasts' absolute intransigence in the face of calls for a discussion of reasonable measures to address America's epidemic of gun violence leads to the passage of unreasonable measures?
BTW - It's official; GOP Prez-wannabe Mike Huckabee is an idiot.
BTW2 - As short as this post is, it has taken hours to write; every time I get rolling, the grief, frustration, and yes, anger, well up, and I have to stop writing.
With that, time to stop writing. For tonight...
Saturday, December 15, 2012
Thursday, December 13, 2012
Are the 2014 elections over yet? Campaign committee update...
Nah. It's just started.
Even though the calendar hasn't changed even to 2013 yet, some intrepid souls have already formed candidate or exploratory committees for 2014.
First, however, one last note from the 2012 elections.
In the race to serve out two years of a term as the Arrowhead Justice of the Peace (Maricopa County), Craig Wismer, a former staffer for the soon-to-be retired US Sen. Jon Kyl, emerged victorious from the field of nine write-in candidates. They all had to run as write-ins because the previous occupant of the office had been removed from office after the deadline for candidates to be on the ballot. Assuming that he wants a full term in the office, Wismer will have to run again in 2014.
On to the main thrust of this post. :)
Already forming committees are:
Democrat Christopher Campas of Sierra Vista for Secretary of State. An active Democrat and member of the state party's executive board, but to the best of my knowledge has never held elected office.
Independent Diana Elizabeth Ramseys-Rasmussen-Kennedy of Phoenix for Governor. Just speculating here, but given the committee's current campaign finance report is a week late, and counting, and the committee's email address is youvefoundme@hotmail.com, this probably isn't a serious candidacy.
Republican Jack Harper, currently a state representative, has an open committee for a run at secretary of state, but he has announced that he will not pursue elected office in 2014. Things could still change, but at this point, he looks like he is putting his political career on the back burner for a while.
Democrat Sharon Thomas of Phoenix for superintendent of public instruction. As with Campas above, an active D, including time on the state party executive board, and no elected office experience (again, to the best of my knowledge).
Republican John Huppenthal, currently the state superintendent of public instruction, has an open exploratory committee, no office specified. Could be for a re-election run, but given that the top two offices on the ballot (Governor and Secretary of State) will be "open", he could set his sights higher.
Republican Michelle Reagan, currently a state senator, has an open exploratory committee, no office specified. This is a normal practice for her as it allows her to fund raise for her next legislative campaign, but this could be the cycle where she goes for a statewide office.
James Samuelson of Mesa, no party specified, has an open exploratory for a run at governor. Don't know anything about his, and his name makes for lousy search terms.
A few of the other names sure to be mentioned for 2014, even if they don't have open committees as yet:
Democrats Fred Duval and Chad Campbell are likely to run for governor. The knowledge of their interest in the job has moved beyond "rumored", thru "worst-kept secret in AZ politics" to "OK, where do we sign?" (as in "sign a nominating petition").
Democrat Felecia Rotellini seems likely to run for attorney general. She was the Democratic nominee for AG in 2010 and was an impressive candidate. She was swamped in the Republican wave that year, but given that her opponent that year, eventual victor Tom Horne, may be indicted before the end of his term, she may find the way a little smoother in 2014.
Democrat Rodney Glassman, the 2010 D nominee for US Senate, hasn't announced any specific intentions (at least, not that I've heard), but he just sent out a mailer that announced the birth of his new baby daughter, advised people that he and his wife will be publishing a children's book, that his wife was recently elected to a school board here in Maricopa County (Madison Elementary), and that, oh yeah, he's still serving in the reserves. The upshot is that either he has so many friends that he qualifies for bulk rate postage when mailing out season's greetings, or he's a politician looking to keep his name in front of people.
You don't have to be a cynic like me to figure that he's looking at another run for office. But cynicism helps. :)
I'm sure that there will be more to come...
Even though the calendar hasn't changed even to 2013 yet, some intrepid souls have already formed candidate or exploratory committees for 2014.
First, however, one last note from the 2012 elections.
In the race to serve out two years of a term as the Arrowhead Justice of the Peace (Maricopa County), Craig Wismer, a former staffer for the soon-to-be retired US Sen. Jon Kyl, emerged victorious from the field of nine write-in candidates. They all had to run as write-ins because the previous occupant of the office had been removed from office after the deadline for candidates to be on the ballot. Assuming that he wants a full term in the office, Wismer will have to run again in 2014.
On to the main thrust of this post. :)
Already forming committees are:
Democrat Christopher Campas of Sierra Vista for Secretary of State. An active Democrat and member of the state party's executive board, but to the best of my knowledge has never held elected office.
Independent Diana Elizabeth Ramseys-Rasmussen-Kennedy of Phoenix for Governor. Just speculating here, but given the committee's current campaign finance report is a week late, and counting, and the committee's email address is youvefoundme@hotmail.com, this probably isn't a serious candidacy.
Republican Jack Harper, currently a state representative, has an open committee for a run at secretary of state, but he has announced that he will not pursue elected office in 2014. Things could still change, but at this point, he looks like he is putting his political career on the back burner for a while.
Democrat Sharon Thomas of Phoenix for superintendent of public instruction. As with Campas above, an active D, including time on the state party executive board, and no elected office experience (again, to the best of my knowledge).
Republican John Huppenthal, currently the state superintendent of public instruction, has an open exploratory committee, no office specified. Could be for a re-election run, but given that the top two offices on the ballot (Governor and Secretary of State) will be "open", he could set his sights higher.
Republican Michelle Reagan, currently a state senator, has an open exploratory committee, no office specified. This is a normal practice for her as it allows her to fund raise for her next legislative campaign, but this could be the cycle where she goes for a statewide office.
James Samuelson of Mesa, no party specified, has an open exploratory for a run at governor. Don't know anything about his, and his name makes for lousy search terms.
A few of the other names sure to be mentioned for 2014, even if they don't have open committees as yet:
Democrats Fred Duval and Chad Campbell are likely to run for governor. The knowledge of their interest in the job has moved beyond "rumored", thru "worst-kept secret in AZ politics" to "OK, where do we sign?" (as in "sign a nominating petition").
Democrat Felecia Rotellini seems likely to run for attorney general. She was the Democratic nominee for AG in 2010 and was an impressive candidate. She was swamped in the Republican wave that year, but given that her opponent that year, eventual victor Tom Horne, may be indicted before the end of his term, she may find the way a little smoother in 2014.
Democrat Rodney Glassman, the 2010 D nominee for US Senate, hasn't announced any specific intentions (at least, not that I've heard), but he just sent out a mailer that announced the birth of his new baby daughter, advised people that he and his wife will be publishing a children's book, that his wife was recently elected to a school board here in Maricopa County (Madison Elementary), and that, oh yeah, he's still serving in the reserves. The upshot is that either he has so many friends that he qualifies for bulk rate postage when mailing out season's greetings, or he's a politician looking to keep his name in front of people.
You don't have to be a cynic like me to figure that he's looking at another run for office. But cynicism helps. :)
I'm sure that there will be more to come...
Friday, December 07, 2012
2013 AZ lege: And the first one out of the gate is...
State Rep. Carl Seel (R-Unthinking and Unrepentant Nativist Before It Was Cool)...
Before each session of the lege, members can "pre-file" bills for consideration in the upcoming session.
There are some bragging rights that go with having the first bill, but not much more - generally, the first bill filed doesn't pass (though, on occasion, the idea in that first bill will be put into another measure that does pass).
This year, Rep. Seel, a former member of the Minutemen, ananti-Latino "border watch" group, has expanded his repertoire. Instead of just opposing Mexicans and people of Mexican descent, he's also opposing health care coverage for most Arizonans.
To whit: the new HB2001, which is almost elegant in its simplicity. Almost.
From the bill, actually, the measure in its entirety -
The fact that this measure is redundant because Governor Jan Brewer already decided that the state won't establish or administer a state-based health care exchange, leaving it to the federal government, apparently doesn't matter to Seel, nor does the fact that the measure exposes him to charges of hypocrisy - a fervent "states' rights" guy ceding this to the feds? It will be interesting to see how he will twist his professed ideology to reconcile the conflict if/when the bill is the subject of committee consideration.
Wonder if he had to use a pretzel-shaped pen to write this bill?
Before each session of the lege, members can "pre-file" bills for consideration in the upcoming session.
There are some bragging rights that go with having the first bill, but not much more - generally, the first bill filed doesn't pass (though, on occasion, the idea in that first bill will be put into another measure that does pass).
This year, Rep. Seel, a former member of the Minutemen, an
To whit: the new HB2001, which is almost elegant in its simplicity. Almost.
From the bill, actually, the measure in its entirety -
CHAPTER 23
HEALTH CARE EXCHANGE
ARTICLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
20-3250. State-based health care exchange; prohibition
THIS STATE MAY NOT ESTABLISH OR ADMINISTER A STATE-BASED HEALTH CARE
EXCHANGE.
The fact that this measure is redundant because Governor Jan Brewer already decided that the state won't establish or administer a state-based health care exchange, leaving it to the federal government, apparently doesn't matter to Seel, nor does the fact that the measure exposes him to charges of hypocrisy - a fervent "states' rights" guy ceding this to the feds? It will be interesting to see how he will twist his professed ideology to reconcile the conflict if/when the bill is the subject of committee consideration.
Wonder if he had to use a pretzel-shaped pen to write this bill?
Monday, December 03, 2012
It's pretty much official: Jan Brewer has accepted her lame duck status...with the emphasis on "lame"
The governor of Arizona has relatively few things that she can do without approval of the lege. One of those things is to officially accept the canvass (results) of an election.
The ceremony involved in the acceptance of the canvas also gives her the opportunity to bond with the people who benefitted the most from the election, the new leadership in the lege.
Also known as the people she needs to be chummy with if she wants to have any influence at the lege during her lame duckness (her term expires in 2014 and she can't run again).
So when the canvass was officially accepted on Monday, where was Brewer?
Not there. Not sure exactly where she was, but it wasn't in Arizona doing her job.
From the Arizona Republic, written by Mary Jo Pitzl -
I don't know where she is, but apparently, the definition of "official state business" has been expanded.
Greatly.
From Politico, written by Kenneth Vogel (emphasis mine) -
Hitting up big donors for funds for a presidential campaign is "official state business"? Since when?
As I am writing this, news is breaking that Brewer will be visiting Afghanistan later this week. My question is this trip something that will benefit Arizona and Arizonans, or is it just a taxpayer-funded pre-presidential campaign photo-op?
Now, I think the thought of a Brewer presidential candidacy is laughable, but we should all remember that Brewer is probably no dumber than George W. Bush, and he ended up buying, blustering, and BS'ing his way into two terms in the White House.
The ceremony involved in the acceptance of the canvas also gives her the opportunity to bond with the people who benefitted the most from the election, the new leadership in the lege.
Also known as the people she needs to be chummy with if she wants to have any influence at the lege during her lame duckness (her term expires in 2014 and she can't run again).
So when the canvass was officially accepted on Monday, where was Brewer?
Not there. Not sure exactly where she was, but it wasn't in Arizona doing her job.
From the Arizona Republic, written by Mary Jo Pitzl -
Brewer out of state; aide won’t provide details
Gov. Jan Brewer is out and about this week, but don’t look for her in Arizona.
The GOP governor left the state Sunday and doesn’t plan to return until Saturday, according to the notice she is required to file with the Arizona Secretary of State. But beyond that, mum’s the word from her office, other than to note that she is on official state business.
I don't know where she is, but apparently, the definition of "official state business" has been expanded.
Greatly.
From Politico, written by Kenneth Vogel (emphasis mine) -
A week after Election Day, three Republican governors mentioned as 2016
presidential candidates — Bobby Jindal, John Kasich and Bob McDonnell — each
stopped by the Venetian Resort Hotel Casino to meet privately with its owner
Sheldon Adelson, a man who could single-handedly underwrite their White House ambitions.
{snip}
So, too, did a pair of governors not considered presidential aspirants — Rick
Scott of Florida, who is up for reelection in 2014, and Jan Brewer of Arizona,
who will be term-limited out of office.
Hitting up big donors for funds for a presidential campaign is "official state business"? Since when?
As I am writing this, news is breaking that Brewer will be visiting Afghanistan later this week. My question is this trip something that will benefit Arizona and Arizonans, or is it just a taxpayer-funded pre-presidential campaign photo-op?
 |
| Update snipped from Facebook at 8:24 p.m. |
Now, I think the thought of a Brewer presidential candidacy is laughable, but we should all remember that Brewer is probably no dumber than George W. Bush, and he ended up buying, blustering, and BS'ing his way into two terms in the White House.
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
Lester Pearce censured by the Arizona Supreme Court
Lester Pearce, brother of former state legislator Russell Pearce and a former Justice of the Peace in Maricopa County, was censured by the Arizona Supreme Court because of misconduct in office.
The charges against Pearce stemmed from his active involvement in his brother's (ultimately unsuccessful) campaign to fight being recalled from the state senate.
Judges of all sorts, even JPs, are barred from engaging in partisan political activity or campaigned for a candidate other than themselves.
After fighting the charges for months, Pearce stopped contesting the charges to allow the matter to come to a close (he never admitted his guilt). Based on media reports, in addition to the censure, Pearce will have to pay a small fine/reimbursement for the costs of the investigation (~$1500).
And the money may be the most painful part of this for Pearce.
The censure itself is little more than the AZ Supreme Court wagging a scolding finger at Pearce (no, not *that* finger :) ). As he is 67 and his most recent campaign, a run for the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, ended with a loss in the Republican primary, it seems likely that he won't be running for public office again.
Perhaps he will be active in the rumored "Pearce putsch" at the AZGOP's reorganizational meeting in January. If that is successful, he might be able to give elected office another shot, but if his party signals that it is embracing the Pearce clan's extremeist positions less enthusiastically (i.e. - doesn't support the wingnuts in their intended complete takeover of the AZGOP), he'd have trouble getting through any primary, not just the most recent one.
The charges against Pearce stemmed from his active involvement in his brother's (ultimately unsuccessful) campaign to fight being recalled from the state senate.
Judges of all sorts, even JPs, are barred from engaging in partisan political activity or campaigned for a candidate other than themselves.
After fighting the charges for months, Pearce stopped contesting the charges to allow the matter to come to a close (he never admitted his guilt). Based on media reports, in addition to the censure, Pearce will have to pay a small fine/reimbursement for the costs of the investigation (~$1500).
And the money may be the most painful part of this for Pearce.
The censure itself is little more than the AZ Supreme Court wagging a scolding finger at Pearce (no, not *that* finger :) ). As he is 67 and his most recent campaign, a run for the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, ended with a loss in the Republican primary, it seems likely that he won't be running for public office again.
Perhaps he will be active in the rumored "Pearce putsch" at the AZGOP's reorganizational meeting in January. If that is successful, he might be able to give elected office another shot, but if his party signals that it is embracing the Pearce clan's extremeist positions less enthusiastically (i.e. - doesn't support the wingnuts in their intended complete takeover of the AZGOP), he'd have trouble getting through any primary, not just the most recent one.
Monday, November 26, 2012
Maricopa County Board of Supervisors disenfranchising part of their own county
When Ben Arredondo (D-LD17) resigned from the Arizona House of Representatives, it created a vacancy in the legislature, leaving a district, part of Maricopa County, under-represented.
There is a specific series of steps to be followed to fill that vacancy.
Basically, once notified of the vacancy, the elected precinct committeemen of the same party and district as the person who vacated the legislative office meet, and nominate three persons to fill the seat. The names are then forwarded to the board of supervisors of the applicable county (in the case of Arredondo's Tempe/South Scottsdale district, Maricopa County), and the supes appoint one of the three to fill the seat.
In the case of the vacancy in LD17, everyone has done their part...except for the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, who are now refusing to make any appointment at all. There was a rumor that there was going to be an appointment on the agenda of Monday's meeting of the MCBOS, but that didn't happen, nor is such an item on the agenda for the Wednesday meeting.
Now, state law seems to be pretty clear, once the other steps have been followed, the supes *must* appoint someone to fill the seat. From ARS 41 - 1202 (linked above to "steps") (emphasis mine)-
I've heard a few different speculations about the motivation behind the supes' refusal to follow the law here -
- It's a Democratic-controlled seat, and the Republicans on the board are simply playing partisan games.
- Two of the Republicans on the MCBOS are lame ducks, so they know if the Board's failure to do its duty comes back to bite them in the ass, it won't impact them - they're gone anyway.
- A few people have pointed out that the appointment of Juan Mendez, who recently won election to the AZ House from the new LD26, would highlight the fact that for the purpose of term limits, even a partial term counts as a full term. Something that the Rs may not want highlighted as long an Jan Brewer is trying to argue that she can run for another term as governor, even though the law says that she cannot because of the partial term she held after Janet Napolitano left AZ behind for D.C.
Whether the motivation is one of the above reasons, or is another entirely (though I admit, I'm leaning toward partisan gamesmanship, but I'm a cynic), I have to ask -
What's the hang-up? This isn't theoretical physics. It's not difficult. Get it done.
The people of LD17 want a representative. The people of LD17 need a representative. And state law requires that the MCBOS appoint a representative from the list of nominees given to them.
Imagine the uproar if a Democratic-controlled board of supes, say in Pima County, refused to fill a lege seat held by a Republican. There would outraged calls to mobilize theArizona National Guard governor's personal vigilante force to invade the offending county and force them to appoint a Republican.
People beyond the list of nominees are watching this all play out (or not) and are voicing their opinions of what is going on, and the most charitable description that I've heard is "frustrating" because not only are the supes not doing their job, they've been sending mixed signals, saying (through surrogates like staffers) that an appointment will be made, and then it won't be, and then it will be, and then it won't be, and so on.
Contact the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and urge them to do their job and appoint someone to represent part of their county at the state legislature.
Steve at The Arizona Eagletarian has more coverage of this here.
There is a specific series of steps to be followed to fill that vacancy.
Basically, once notified of the vacancy, the elected precinct committeemen of the same party and district as the person who vacated the legislative office meet, and nominate three persons to fill the seat. The names are then forwarded to the board of supervisors of the applicable county (in the case of Arredondo's Tempe/South Scottsdale district, Maricopa County), and the supes appoint one of the three to fill the seat.
In the case of the vacancy in LD17, everyone has done their part...except for the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, who are now refusing to make any appointment at all. There was a rumor that there was going to be an appointment on the agenda of Monday's meeting of the MCBOS, but that didn't happen, nor is such an item on the agenda for the Wednesday meeting.
Now, state law seems to be pretty clear, once the other steps have been followed, the supes *must* appoint someone to fill the seat. From ARS 41 - 1202 (linked above to "steps") (emphasis mine)-
4. The state party chairman of the appropriate political party shall forward the names of the three persons named pursuant to paragraph 2 of this subsection to the board of supervisors of the county of residence of the person elected or appointed to the office immediately before the vacancy occurred. The board of supervisors shall appoint a person from the three nominees submitted.
I've heard a few different speculations about the motivation behind the supes' refusal to follow the law here -
- It's a Democratic-controlled seat, and the Republicans on the board are simply playing partisan games.
- Two of the Republicans on the MCBOS are lame ducks, so they know if the Board's failure to do its duty comes back to bite them in the ass, it won't impact them - they're gone anyway.
- A few people have pointed out that the appointment of Juan Mendez, who recently won election to the AZ House from the new LD26, would highlight the fact that for the purpose of term limits, even a partial term counts as a full term. Something that the Rs may not want highlighted as long an Jan Brewer is trying to argue that she can run for another term as governor, even though the law says that she cannot because of the partial term she held after Janet Napolitano left AZ behind for D.C.
Whether the motivation is one of the above reasons, or is another entirely (though I admit, I'm leaning toward partisan gamesmanship, but I'm a cynic), I have to ask -
What's the hang-up? This isn't theoretical physics. It's not difficult. Get it done.
The people of LD17 want a representative. The people of LD17 need a representative. And state law requires that the MCBOS appoint a representative from the list of nominees given to them.
Imagine the uproar if a Democratic-controlled board of supes, say in Pima County, refused to fill a lege seat held by a Republican. There would outraged calls to mobilize the
People beyond the list of nominees are watching this all play out (or not) and are voicing their opinions of what is going on, and the most charitable description that I've heard is "frustrating" because not only are the supes not doing their job, they've been sending mixed signals, saying (through surrogates like staffers) that an appointment will be made, and then it won't be, and then it will be, and then it won't be, and so on.
Contact the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and urge them to do their job and appoint someone to represent part of their county at the state legislature.
Steve at The Arizona Eagletarian has more coverage of this here.
AZHouse Democratic committee assignments for 2013
Preparations for the upcoming session of the Arizona Legislature continue apace. In the latest development, the committee assignments for House Democrats were announced. Note: the word "Ranking" next to a representative's name indicates that particular member is also serving as the leader of the Democrats on that particular committee.
From the press release -
From the press release -
Agriculture and
Water
- Juan Carlos “J.C.” Escamilla
- Rosanna Gabaldon
- Catherine Miranda (Ranking)
Appropriations
- Lela Alston
- Chad Campbell (Ranking)
- Stefanie Mach
- Andrew Sherwood
Commerce
- Stefanie Mach
- Debbie McCune Davis (Ranking)
- Catherine Miranda
Education
- Eric Meyer (Ranking)
- Catherine Miranda
- Lisa Otondo
Energy, Environment and Natural Resources
- Albert Hale (Ranking)
- Jamescita Peshlakai
- Macario Saldate
Federalism and
Fiscal Responsibility
- Lupe Contreras
- Jonathan Larkin
- Bruce Wheeler (Ranking)
Financial
Institutions
- Lela Alston (Ranking)
- Rosanna Gabaldon
- Lydia Hernandez
Government
- Andrea Dalessandro
- Lydia Hernandez
- Martin Quezada (Ranking)
Health
- Sally Gonzales
- Eric Meyer (Ranking)
- Victoria Steele
Higher Education and
Workforce Development
- Lela Alston
- Jonathan Larkin
- Macario Saldate (Ranking)
Insurance and
Retirement
- Debbie McCune Davis (Ranking)
- Juan Mendez
- Victoria Steele
Judiciary:
- Lupe Contreras
- Albert Hale
- Martin Quezada (Ranking)
Public Safety,
Military and Regulatory Affairs
- Mark Cardenas
- Ruben Gallego (Ranking)
- Jamescita Peshlakai
Reform and Human
Services
- Andrea Dalessandro
- Sally Gonzales (Ranking)
- Juan Mendez
Rules:
- Albert Hale (Ranking)
- Martin Quezada
- Bruce Wheeler
Technology and
Infrastructure
- Lisa Otondo (Ranking)
- Andrew Sherwood
Transportation
- Juan Carlos “J.C.” Escamilla
- Victoria Steele (Ranking)
Ways and Means
- Mark Cardenas
- Ruben Gallego (Ranking)
- Bruce Wheeler
Sunday, November 25, 2012
Arizona doesn't have the "batshit crazy hypocrite" market cornered...
...not by a long shot.
Though I do think we lead the nation in "crazy per capita"...
h/t to the blog Juanita Jean's - The World's Most Dangerous Beauty Salon, Inc. for noticing this.
From The Guardian (UK), written by Karen McVeigh -
The bills in question are Michigan House Bills 5684 and 5685. Most of the crazy stuff is in 5684, and in this testimony submitted by an anti-woman group in MI. Warning to anyone who reads the testimony: Medical studies have shown that saccharin in these quantities may cause cancer, and I don't know if AZ (or MI, for that matter) has a tax credit for chemotherapy drugs.
Look for Cathi Herrod of the Center for ArizonaTheocracy Policy to try to "one up" this scheme in the upcoming session of the Arizona Legislature,
Though I do think we lead the nation in "crazy per capita"...
h/t to the blog Juanita Jean's - The World's Most Dangerous Beauty Salon, Inc. for noticing this.
From The Guardian (UK), written by Karen McVeigh -
Michigan Republicans propose tax credit for unborn foetuses
Republican lawmakers in Michigan, a state which eliminated tax credits for children last year, have proposed a tax credit for unborn foetuses of 12 weeks gestation.
If the measure, outlined in two bills heard by the house tax policy committee on Tuesday, becomes law it would be the first of its kind in the US.
{snip}
One of the main sponsors of the foetus tax credit bill, Jud Gilbert, a Republican representative of Algonac, said the rationale behind it was to recognise that mothers have additional bills to pay.
"You're recognizing the fact that people have additional expenses, another person to take care of," he told told Mlive. "Money saved there could be contributed to doctor's bills and all kinds of things."
Gilbert said the move would speed up a tax exemption that parents only get when a child is born.
However, tax exemptions for children and families have been cut in the state, to the extent that another 9,000 children have been forced into poverty as a result, according to policy groups.
The bills in question are Michigan House Bills 5684 and 5685. Most of the crazy stuff is in 5684, and in this testimony submitted by an anti-woman group in MI. Warning to anyone who reads the testimony: Medical studies have shown that saccharin in these quantities may cause cancer, and I don't know if AZ (or MI, for that matter) has a tax credit for chemotherapy drugs.
Look for Cathi Herrod of the Center for Arizona
Thursday, November 22, 2012
Legislative committee assignments: Portents for 2013
Recently, AZBlueMeanie at Blog for Arizona posted the list of committees and their chairs for the upcoming legislative session. As the Republicans control both chambers of the lege, they get to decide which committees exist and who runs them.
While I can't predict what legislation they will try to slough off on the state this year (though the list of ALEC model legislation should provide a good hint), the list of chairs and committees may provide some insight in what to expect, and not expect, from the 2013 session of the lege.
Don Shooter returns as chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Last session, he refused to allow public input into the state's annual budget. Given his long record of contempt for his constituents and other Arizonans, I don't expect things to improve in the next session.
Jeff Dial will be the chair of the new House Higher Education and Workforce Development Committee. Dial is known best as being just bright enough to do what he is told when it comes to legislation to support, no matter how bad the legislation - like his scheme to humiliate poor people, or the bill that he sponsored/fronted for the credit collection industry that allows them to go to court have someone declared as owing a debt simply on the basis of records generated by the collector. Expect any moves to further eviscerate public higher ed and/or unions to be run through Dial. Many of the moves will have Dial's name attached, but the fingerprints of others, particularly industry lobbyists, will be all over the measures.
However, the committee to watch in the new legislature may be the Senate Elections Committee, headed up by Michelle Reagan.
During the last session of the lege, the Republican powers-that-be in the lege deemed that economic development and job creation were the priority of the lege, and put her in charge of the committee charged with help AZ recover from the Great Recession.
In the light of the fiasco of Arizona's seemingly never-ending vote counting process, those same powers-that-be have deemed that some sort of elections "reform" will be a priority for the new legislature. To that end, they've placed Reagan in charge of it, just as she was in charge of their work for Arizona's economic recovery.
Reagan is an experienced and respected legislator, so this is a sign that the Rs in the lege take Arizona's vote counting mess seriously, right?
Perhaps not.
The committee that Reagan ran during the last legislature was ever-so-slightly less than busy -
During the First Session of the 50th Arizona Legislature (2011 to folks like us), Reagan's Economic Development and Job Creation Committee met all of four times (out of 11 weeks available for normal committee meetings) for a total of 3 hours and 45 minutes.
As bad as that sounds, it's still better than the committee's performance during the Second Session of the 50th Arizona Legislature (2012, for those following along on their scorecards at home). That edition of Reagan's committee met once during the eleven weeks set aside for normal committee meetings. That one meeting lasted 1 hour and 12 minutes.
None of this bodes well for the possibility that the Rs in the lege plan anything to address the problems with counting votes that were exhibited in Arizona this year.
Of course, Reagan's committee could become active if the federal Voting Rights Act is weakened or overturned by the US Supreme Court during its upcoming consideration of lawsuits against the VRA.
Of course2, any such activity won't be designed to improve democracy, or voting, in Arizona.
While I can't predict what legislation they will try to slough off on the state this year (though the list of ALEC model legislation should provide a good hint), the list of chairs and committees may provide some insight in what to expect, and not expect, from the 2013 session of the lege.
Don Shooter returns as chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Last session, he refused to allow public input into the state's annual budget. Given his long record of contempt for his constituents and other Arizonans, I don't expect things to improve in the next session.
Jeff Dial will be the chair of the new House Higher Education and Workforce Development Committee. Dial is known best as being just bright enough to do what he is told when it comes to legislation to support, no matter how bad the legislation - like his scheme to humiliate poor people, or the bill that he sponsored/fronted for the credit collection industry that allows them to go to court have someone declared as owing a debt simply on the basis of records generated by the collector. Expect any moves to further eviscerate public higher ed and/or unions to be run through Dial. Many of the moves will have Dial's name attached, but the fingerprints of others, particularly industry lobbyists, will be all over the measures.
However, the committee to watch in the new legislature may be the Senate Elections Committee, headed up by Michelle Reagan.
During the last session of the lege, the Republican powers-that-be in the lege deemed that economic development and job creation were the priority of the lege, and put her in charge of the committee charged with help AZ recover from the Great Recession.
In the light of the fiasco of Arizona's seemingly never-ending vote counting process, those same powers-that-be have deemed that some sort of elections "reform" will be a priority for the new legislature. To that end, they've placed Reagan in charge of it, just as she was in charge of their work for Arizona's economic recovery.
Reagan is an experienced and respected legislator, so this is a sign that the Rs in the lege take Arizona's vote counting mess seriously, right?
Perhaps not.
The committee that Reagan ran during the last legislature was ever-so-slightly less than busy -
During the First Session of the 50th Arizona Legislature (2011 to folks like us), Reagan's Economic Development and Job Creation Committee met all of four times (out of 11 weeks available for normal committee meetings) for a total of 3 hours and 45 minutes.
As bad as that sounds, it's still better than the committee's performance during the Second Session of the 50th Arizona Legislature (2012, for those following along on their scorecards at home). That edition of Reagan's committee met once during the eleven weeks set aside for normal committee meetings. That one meeting lasted 1 hour and 12 minutes.
None of this bodes well for the possibility that the Rs in the lege plan anything to address the problems with counting votes that were exhibited in Arizona this year.
Of course, Reagan's committee could become active if the federal Voting Rights Act is weakened or overturned by the US Supreme Court during its upcoming consideration of lawsuits against the VRA.
Of course2, any such activity won't be designed to improve democracy, or voting, in Arizona.
Wednesday, November 14, 2012
AZ Ballot counting update
Full Congressional and state-level race results can be found here, from the Arizona Secretary of State.
In CD2, D Ron Barber has opened up a 943 vote lead over R Martha McSally. It's not enough to declare Barber the winner, but this is his largest lead thus far.
In CD9, D Kyrsten Sinema has been declared the winner over R Vernon Parker; the margin there is currently Sinema ahead by 7146 votes.
In the race for the 2nd seat from LD28, D Eric Meyer has opened up a lead of 1523 votes over R Amanda Reeve. This one isn't *quite* over, but this late in the post-election counting cycle, that's a pretty big margin for someone to overcome, particularly in a relatively small area like a legislative district.
The race for US Senate between D Richard Carmona and R Jeff Flake has reached the point where there isn't even a spark of hope left - Carmona is still behind by more than 81K votes.
Full Maricopa County-level results can be found here, and a summary of Wednesday's ballot counting activity in Maricopa County can be found here, both from the Maricopa County Recorder.
In Maricopa County, there are approximately 27K early ballots and 114K provisional ballots remaining to be counted.
All but one race looks to be effectively over - D Paul Penzone trails R Joe Arpaio in the Maricopa County Sheriff by almost 87K votes and Heather Macre leads Jean McGrath for the fifth and final open spot on the board of directors of the Central Arizona Project by more than 3500 votes.
The one race that doesn't look to be decided is the race to serve out the remainder of the term in the office of Arrowhead Justice of the Peace. Those are all write ballots because the former JP there, Phillip Woolbright, was removed from office after the deadline for candidates to submit nominating petitions.
The official canvass of results is supposed to be reported on Monday, November 26, but unofficial reports (means "stuff people have told me, people who aren't on the Recorder's staff, but are informed about developments in this area") that we may not find out the winner in the race until December.
I have some confidence that we may know the winner here by the 26th, but we'll see.
In CD2, D Ron Barber has opened up a 943 vote lead over R Martha McSally. It's not enough to declare Barber the winner, but this is his largest lead thus far.
In CD9, D Kyrsten Sinema has been declared the winner over R Vernon Parker; the margin there is currently Sinema ahead by 7146 votes.
In the race for the 2nd seat from LD28, D Eric Meyer has opened up a lead of 1523 votes over R Amanda Reeve. This one isn't *quite* over, but this late in the post-election counting cycle, that's a pretty big margin for someone to overcome, particularly in a relatively small area like a legislative district.
The race for US Senate between D Richard Carmona and R Jeff Flake has reached the point where there isn't even a spark of hope left - Carmona is still behind by more than 81K votes.
Full Maricopa County-level results can be found here, and a summary of Wednesday's ballot counting activity in Maricopa County can be found here, both from the Maricopa County Recorder.
In Maricopa County, there are approximately 27K early ballots and 114K provisional ballots remaining to be counted.
All but one race looks to be effectively over - D Paul Penzone trails R Joe Arpaio in the Maricopa County Sheriff by almost 87K votes and Heather Macre leads Jean McGrath for the fifth and final open spot on the board of directors of the Central Arizona Project by more than 3500 votes.
The one race that doesn't look to be decided is the race to serve out the remainder of the term in the office of Arrowhead Justice of the Peace. Those are all write ballots because the former JP there, Phillip Woolbright, was removed from office after the deadline for candidates to submit nominating petitions.
The official canvass of results is supposed to be reported on Monday, November 26, but unofficial reports (means "stuff people have told me, people who aren't on the Recorder's staff, but are informed about developments in this area") that we may not find out the winner in the race until December.
I have some confidence that we may know the winner here by the 26th, but we'll see.
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Andrew Thomas, disgraced former Maricopa County Attorney, threatens to run for governor
News broke today that disbarred former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas is considering a 2014 run for governor, joining current Governor Jan Brewer in the "whatthehell are the smoking?" club.
Thomas ran amuck as Maricopa County Attorney, misusing his office to attack the county's judiciary, independent media, Latino residents, and any perceived adversaries of him and his staunch ally, Joe Arpaio.
The state bar association finally got fed up with Thomas' antics and brought him to heel, by disbarring him and one of his former assistant county attorneys and suspending another of his assistant CAs.
Since then, he has continued a rhetorical jihad against against the Arizona Bar Association, the county judiciary, and anyone else who declines to smooch his posterior.
Now, he wants voters to ignore his past misuse of office and give him a stint on the 9th Floor so that he can expand his jihad to the whole state.
I think Thomas may be serious.
Seriously deluded.
However, we can now safely predict at least four of the names that will publicly state, or at least hint at, their interest in a 2014 gubernortorial run -
Brewer, if she can get the state supreme court to go along with her scheme to ignore the state constitution (don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen)
Thomas, if his meds don't kick in (or more likely, if he doesn't start taking them)
Joe Arpaio, the perpetually thisclosetoindicted Maricopa County Sheriff and saddle partner of Thomas (he gets coy about a run in April or May of every gubernortorial election year, but never goes through with it - such a run would require him to resign as county sheriff)
and Fife Symington. The Fifester was AZ's governor for much of the 1990s, until his conviction in federal court on fraud charges. The verdict was later overturned on appeal and he was then pardoned by then-President Bill Clinton before he could be retried. However, he resigned from office upon his conviction on felony charges. And even though his political career was thoroughly kaput (the post-conviction UFO sighting didn't help make things better), every four years, he hints at another run.
Those hints are greeted mostly by yawns, choruses of "Fife who?", and choruses of "yes!!" from wiseass bloggers.
Of the four, I'd guess that Thomas is most likely to make a real run; the other three have their own reasons to talk big, but those reasons have nothing to do with actually running in 2014. On the other hand, Thomas has nothing better going on. Hanging around the house, waiting
Still, a potential R primary lineup like that is a dream...for Democrats.
OK - and wiseass bloggers, too. :)
Thomas ran amuck as Maricopa County Attorney, misusing his office to attack the county's judiciary, independent media, Latino residents, and any perceived adversaries of him and his staunch ally, Joe Arpaio.
The state bar association finally got fed up with Thomas' antics and brought him to heel, by disbarring him and one of his former assistant county attorneys and suspending another of his assistant CAs.
Since then, he has continued a rhetorical jihad against against the Arizona Bar Association, the county judiciary, and anyone else who declines to smooch his posterior.
Now, he wants voters to ignore his past misuse of office and give him a stint on the 9th Floor so that he can expand his jihad to the whole state.
I think Thomas may be serious.
Seriously deluded.
However, we can now safely predict at least four of the names that will publicly state, or at least hint at, their interest in a 2014 gubernortorial run -
Brewer, if she can get the state supreme court to go along with her scheme to ignore the state constitution (don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen)
Thomas, if his meds don't kick in (or more likely, if he doesn't start taking them)
Joe Arpaio, the perpetually thisclosetoindicted Maricopa County Sheriff and saddle partner of Thomas (he gets coy about a run in April or May of every gubernortorial election year, but never goes through with it - such a run would require him to resign as county sheriff)
and Fife Symington. The Fifester was AZ's governor for much of the 1990s, until his conviction in federal court on fraud charges. The verdict was later overturned on appeal and he was then pardoned by then-President Bill Clinton before he could be retried. However, he resigned from office upon his conviction on felony charges. And even though his political career was thoroughly kaput (the post-conviction UFO sighting didn't help make things better), every four years, he hints at another run.
Those hints are greeted mostly by yawns, choruses of "Fife who?", and choruses of "yes!!" from wiseass bloggers.
Of the four, I'd guess that Thomas is most likely to make a real run; the other three have their own reasons to talk big, but those reasons have nothing to do with actually running in 2014. On the other hand, Thomas has nothing better going on. Hanging around the house, waiting
Still, a potential R primary lineup like that is a dream...for Democrats.
OK - and wiseass bloggers, too. :)
Monday, November 12, 2012
Brewer engages in constitutional quackery in an attempt to stave off imminent lame duck status
From the Arizona Republic, written by Yvonne Wingett Sanchez -
I don't normally quote this much from a linked article, but Sanchez cited the exact section of the AZ Constitution that I was going to, and given the number of times that I've criticized the Republic for shoddy work, it's only fair to give credit where it is due.
Governor Brewer and her hired mouthpiece can protest that there is "ambiguity" in the section, but it's pretty clear. What is also pretty clear is that the Governor and her advisors/handlers are also fully aware that she has to do something to remain relevant at the Capitol.
As a lame duck governor, she is rapidly losing influence because she is viewed as not having a significant say in the choice of her successor. As such, various legislators and other "players" will be focused on positioning themselves for a run at the office on the 9th Floor of the Executive Tower, or in crafting an alliance with the person they think stands the best chance of winning.
Oh, and a couple of asides -
1. Brewer is quoted as saying that the AZ Constitution does not bar her from serving 2 1/4 terms. Without getting into the validity of that claim (OK - it's crap), "2 1/4"? Try closer to "2 1/2" terms, and then only if she is able to overturn the will of the voters as expressed when we enacted term limits on Arizona's state-level elected officials.
She ascended to the governor's office on January 21, 2009; that means she was in the office three weeks less than two years before she started the term she was elected into. That's a lot closer to half of an elected term than it is to a quarter. Of course, the difference is really no difference at all - the way that the law is written, even one day sworn into an office starts the term limits clock.
During the Spring 2013 semester her alma mater, Glendale Community College, is offering three sections of POS221, Arizona Constitution. There are in-person and online sections available, but I suggest an in-person class for her (and perhaps, her "legal scholars and other people") -
At an in-person class, she can ask the instructor to clearly explain "...which shall include any part of a term served...".
2. In this specific situation, it's likely that even if she mounts a successful legal challenge to the Arizona Constitution, the voters may just turn her "success" into a resounding failure. None of us - left, right, Democratic, Republican, independent, Libertarian, Green, engaged, apathetic, whatever - none of us approve of politicians who show blatant contempt for our expressed wishes.
Still suffering postelection hangovers and with votes still being tallied, political junkies in Arizona already have turned toward the 2014 gubernatorial race. For the first time in more than a decade, the seat could be wide open.
{snip}
But the woman who currently occupies the governor’s office on the ninth floor of the Executive Tower may complicate the race, at least for the Republican slate. Gov. Jan Brewer, who completed the final year of former Gov. Janet Napolitano’s term and then successfully ran for a four-year term in 2010, continues to talk publicly about running for a third term.
It would require a legal challenge to the state Constitution. Arizona law permits statewide-elected officials to serve only two consecutive terms. Article 5, Section 1 of the Arizona Constitution states, “No member of the executive department after serving the maximum number of terms, which shall include any part of a term served, may serve in the same office until out of office for no less than one full term.”
Brewer has said there is “ambiguity” in the Constitution, saying she does not read it as barring her from serving 2 1/4 terms.
Joe Kanefield, former general counsel to Brewer who is now in private practice, said the legal question centers on the definition of “term.” He has said drafters were referring to a governor who was elected to a term and not to a governor who inherited the office by succession.
“I haven’t ruled it out, and I’ve been encouraged by people — legal scholars and other people — that it’s probably something that I ought to pursue,” Brewer told The Arizona Republic.
I don't normally quote this much from a linked article, but Sanchez cited the exact section of the AZ Constitution that I was going to, and given the number of times that I've criticized the Republic for shoddy work, it's only fair to give credit where it is due.
Governor Brewer and her hired mouthpiece can protest that there is "ambiguity" in the section, but it's pretty clear. What is also pretty clear is that the Governor and her advisors/handlers are also fully aware that she has to do something to remain relevant at the Capitol.
As a lame duck governor, she is rapidly losing influence because she is viewed as not having a significant say in the choice of her successor. As such, various legislators and other "players" will be focused on positioning themselves for a run at the office on the 9th Floor of the Executive Tower, or in crafting an alliance with the person they think stands the best chance of winning.
Oh, and a couple of asides -
1. Brewer is quoted as saying that the AZ Constitution does not bar her from serving 2 1/4 terms. Without getting into the validity of that claim (OK - it's crap), "2 1/4"? Try closer to "2 1/2" terms, and then only if she is able to overturn the will of the voters as expressed when we enacted term limits on Arizona's state-level elected officials.
She ascended to the governor's office on January 21, 2009; that means she was in the office three weeks less than two years before she started the term she was elected into. That's a lot closer to half of an elected term than it is to a quarter. Of course, the difference is really no difference at all - the way that the law is written, even one day sworn into an office starts the term limits clock.
During the Spring 2013 semester her alma mater, Glendale Community College, is offering three sections of POS221, Arizona Constitution. There are in-person and online sections available, but I suggest an in-person class for her (and perhaps, her "legal scholars and other people") -
At an in-person class, she can ask the instructor to clearly explain "...which shall include any part of a term served...".
2. In this specific situation, it's likely that even if she mounts a successful legal challenge to the Arizona Constitution, the voters may just turn her "success" into a resounding failure. None of us - left, right, Democratic, Republican, independent, Libertarian, Green, engaged, apathetic, whatever - none of us approve of politicians who show blatant contempt for our expressed wishes.
You want people to believe that "both sides are equally crazy" OK. Time to put up or shut up...
One of the most annoying themes that I heard throughout the past election cycle is that "both sides are to blame" or "both parties are controlled by their extreme and fringe elements" or something similar.
It's a line that is oft-repeated by Republicans who are trying to portray themselves as "reasonable" and by mainstream media pundits who are trying to portray themselves as "evenhanded".
However often the line is repeated, though, it just isn't true.
Do we (the Democrats) have our nuts? No doubt about it.
So do the Republicans.
However, the big difference between the Democrats and Republicans in this area is that while we marginalize our loons, the Republicans lionize theirs. Have you heard of the Dems running a PETA slate the way the Rs have run, hell, *embraced* tea party slates?
Even with the elections over (OK, the voting is over, but the counting of the votes continues, but you know what I mean :) ), the spewing of the "both sides are equally bad" BS is continuing.
On Sunday morning's edition of "Sunday Square Off" on Phoenix' channel 12 (KPNX-TV), part of the discussion was about the success/non-success of AZRepublic columnist Laurie Roberts' "Dekook the Capitol" campaign this fall.
Shane Wikfors, a Republican blogger and consultant, chimed in (at approximately the 1:14 mark of the "Dekook" segment of the linked video), saying that any "dekook the Capitol" campaign should include Democratic kooks, and left it at that.
Unfortunately, so did John Loredo, a Democratic political consultant and former legislator, and Brahm Resnick, the show's host. For different reasons (one political, one professional), each of them should have called on Wikfors to back up his allegation with specific names.
They didn't do so, so I will:
Mr. Wikfors,
I don't know if you read this blog, but I'm guessing that someone you know does and will bring this to your attention.
Your stated belief is that there are Democratic kooks at the Capitol, and that if there is any movement to oust, or even criticize, Republican kooks, then any Democratic kooks should be treated similarly.
OK, I'll bite - you name three Democratic Capitol kooks from the most recent session of the lege, and I'll name three Republican kooks, and we'll use our respective blogs to shine a light on them.
Now, "kook" doesn't mean "holds political positions that I disagree with". In this context, it means "engages in activities that bring embarrassment upon their colleagues, constituents, and state".
What's that? You're having trouble thinking of three D kooks in the lege? Let me help you by naming my (first) three Republican kooks -
State Sen. Lori Klein - packed heat on the floor of the House at a State of the State address; aimed a "purty l'il" pink pistol at a reporter to show off the "purty l'il" laser sight; and read what is perhaps the most ignorant and bigoted letter in the annals of Arizona politics, on the floor of the Senate.
State Sen. Don Shooter - showed his opinion of his constituents by showing up at a special session of the lege in costume - a sombrero, serape, and a pistol holster with a half-filled bottle of tequila.
State Sen. Scott Bundgaard - assaulted his girlfriend by the side of a Phoenix freeway, and then claimed legislative immunity from arrest for his crime.
I will spot you one "kook" on the D side of the aisle - State Rep. Daniel Patterson, for his own domestic violence issues.
Of course, even with that example, there is a stark difference - where the House Democratic caucus clamored for Patterson's resignation/removal, the Republican president of the Senate declared that Bundgaard was the victim, not his girlfriend.
Now, you come up with two more D kooks (and given the rather broad definition that I've laid out here, you just may be able to do so).
Then I will name three more R kooks, and then you can name three more Ds, and so on, until one of us runs out of kooks to list.
I expect that I'll be able to list true R kooks long after you are left with only those Ds with whom you disagree, but who conduct themselves professionally and bring no ridicule upon their colleagues, constituents, and state.
Please feel free to respond here in a comment, or on your own blog, Sonoran Alliance.
Bonus rant: AZ Republic columnist Laurie Roberts reiterated her contention that the voters of LD26 (west Mesa, north and central Tempe) are to blame fot the election of Andy Biggs over Steve Pierce by the Republicans. The wingnuts in the R senate caucus deposed Pierce because they think he wasn't supportive enough of the wingnuts in their primary and general election races. Biggs is the leader of the wingers. Hence, he is now Senate president.
Roberts' posits that if the voters of LD26 had voted against their best interests and elected Jerry Lewis to represent them in the Senate, Pierce would have held on to the Senate presidency, leading to a more civil, if not more moderate, Arizona State Senate.
There's a couple of problems with that theory:
1. The voters of LD26, or any district for that matter, are responsible for electing the candidate who will best represent *them*, not necessarily the one that Roberts would prefer. If those choices are the same, fine; if not, Roberts opinion is slightly less than relevant. Other than in her own district (LD23, I think). The senators-elect choose the president of the senate. If any voters can be said to be at fault for Biggs' jerkwater coup d'etat, it would be the voters who voted for the senators who voted for Biggs, not the voters who did not vote for a candidate who might have supported Pierce. I don't buy into that thinking, but if one is inclined to blame voters for this, would it be more fair, and intellectually honest, to blame the ones who voted for supporters of Biggs rather than the ones who voted for someone who doesn't support Biggs?
2. The person who may be most directly to blame for the toppling of Pierce is Sen. John McComish. Supposedly he committed to supporting Pierce, then flip-flopped and supported Biggs (in exchange for a leadership position, if rumor/reports are true.)
It's a line that is oft-repeated by Republicans who are trying to portray themselves as "reasonable" and by mainstream media pundits who are trying to portray themselves as "evenhanded".
However often the line is repeated, though, it just isn't true.
Do we (the Democrats) have our nuts? No doubt about it.
So do the Republicans.
However, the big difference between the Democrats and Republicans in this area is that while we marginalize our loons, the Republicans lionize theirs. Have you heard of the Dems running a PETA slate the way the Rs have run, hell, *embraced* tea party slates?
Even with the elections over (OK, the voting is over, but the counting of the votes continues, but you know what I mean :) ), the spewing of the "both sides are equally bad" BS is continuing.
On Sunday morning's edition of "Sunday Square Off" on Phoenix' channel 12 (KPNX-TV), part of the discussion was about the success/non-success of AZRepublic columnist Laurie Roberts' "Dekook the Capitol" campaign this fall.
Shane Wikfors, a Republican blogger and consultant, chimed in (at approximately the 1:14 mark of the "Dekook" segment of the linked video), saying that any "dekook the Capitol" campaign should include Democratic kooks, and left it at that.
Unfortunately, so did John Loredo, a Democratic political consultant and former legislator, and Brahm Resnick, the show's host. For different reasons (one political, one professional), each of them should have called on Wikfors to back up his allegation with specific names.
They didn't do so, so I will:
Mr. Wikfors,
I don't know if you read this blog, but I'm guessing that someone you know does and will bring this to your attention.
Your stated belief is that there are Democratic kooks at the Capitol, and that if there is any movement to oust, or even criticize, Republican kooks, then any Democratic kooks should be treated similarly.
OK, I'll bite - you name three Democratic Capitol kooks from the most recent session of the lege, and I'll name three Republican kooks, and we'll use our respective blogs to shine a light on them.
Now, "kook" doesn't mean "holds political positions that I disagree with". In this context, it means "engages in activities that bring embarrassment upon their colleagues, constituents, and state".
What's that? You're having trouble thinking of three D kooks in the lege? Let me help you by naming my (first) three Republican kooks -
State Sen. Lori Klein - packed heat on the floor of the House at a State of the State address; aimed a "purty l'il" pink pistol at a reporter to show off the "purty l'il" laser sight; and read what is perhaps the most ignorant and bigoted letter in the annals of Arizona politics, on the floor of the Senate.
State Sen. Don Shooter - showed his opinion of his constituents by showing up at a special session of the lege in costume - a sombrero, serape, and a pistol holster with a half-filled bottle of tequila.
State Sen. Scott Bundgaard - assaulted his girlfriend by the side of a Phoenix freeway, and then claimed legislative immunity from arrest for his crime.
I will spot you one "kook" on the D side of the aisle - State Rep. Daniel Patterson, for his own domestic violence issues.
Of course, even with that example, there is a stark difference - where the House Democratic caucus clamored for Patterson's resignation/removal, the Republican president of the Senate declared that Bundgaard was the victim, not his girlfriend.
Now, you come up with two more D kooks (and given the rather broad definition that I've laid out here, you just may be able to do so).
Then I will name three more R kooks, and then you can name three more Ds, and so on, until one of us runs out of kooks to list.
I expect that I'll be able to list true R kooks long after you are left with only those Ds with whom you disagree, but who conduct themselves professionally and bring no ridicule upon their colleagues, constituents, and state.
Please feel free to respond here in a comment, or on your own blog, Sonoran Alliance.
Bonus rant: AZ Republic columnist Laurie Roberts reiterated her contention that the voters of LD26 (west Mesa, north and central Tempe) are to blame fot the election of Andy Biggs over Steve Pierce by the Republicans. The wingnuts in the R senate caucus deposed Pierce because they think he wasn't supportive enough of the wingnuts in their primary and general election races. Biggs is the leader of the wingers. Hence, he is now Senate president.
Roberts' posits that if the voters of LD26 had voted against their best interests and elected Jerry Lewis to represent them in the Senate, Pierce would have held on to the Senate presidency, leading to a more civil, if not more moderate, Arizona State Senate.
There's a couple of problems with that theory:
1. The voters of LD26, or any district for that matter, are responsible for electing the candidate who will best represent *them*, not necessarily the one that Roberts would prefer. If those choices are the same, fine; if not, Roberts opinion is slightly less than relevant. Other than in her own district (LD23, I think). The senators-elect choose the president of the senate. If any voters can be said to be at fault for Biggs' jerkwater coup d'etat, it would be the voters who voted for the senators who voted for Biggs, not the voters who did not vote for a candidate who might have supported Pierce. I don't buy into that thinking, but if one is inclined to blame voters for this, would it be more fair, and intellectually honest, to blame the ones who voted for supporters of Biggs rather than the ones who voted for someone who doesn't support Biggs?
2. The person who may be most directly to blame for the toppling of Pierce is Sen. John McComish. Supposedly he committed to supporting Pierce, then flip-flopped and supported Biggs (in exchange for a leadership position, if rumor/reports are true.)
Saturday, November 10, 2012
Ballot counting updates: Saturday, November 10
I could not find anything that specifically listed the number of ballots counted today, but since some of the races have changed, obviously, they've been doing some counting.
...In the race for US Senate, R Jeff Flake's lead over D Rich Carmona has grown to a little over 76K vote. The tiniest spark of hope that existed that this race would turn around is fading.
...In CD1, D Ann Kirkpatrick's lead over R Jonathan Paton now stands at 6246 votes, which is down 18 votes from yesterday. Still seems like she is going to hang on here.
...In CD2, D Ron Barber's lead over R Martha McSally stands at 289 votes. As with yesterday's report, this one is still far too close to call.
...In CD9, D Kyrsten Sinema's lead over R Vernon Parker stands at 4710 votes, an increase of 642 votes. The trend and the margin still favor Sinema here; it isn't over, but this contest is on the clock.
...In LD28, D Eric Meyer has opened up a 907-vote lead over R Amanda Reeve for the 2nd House seat in the district, an increase of 224 votes. This race isn't over, but the trend favors Meyer.
- All state-level results can be found here.
...In the race for CAWCD (the board of directors of the Central Arizona Project), the race for the fifth and final seat that is up for election has flipped, with Heather Macre opening up a 977 vote lead over Jean McGrath. Yesterday, McGrath was ahead by 94 votes.
...In the race for Maricopa County Sheriff, R Joe Arpaio's lead over D Paul Penzone has closed to a still-daunting 84025. That's a decrease of 1645 votes, but the pace of change isn't nearly fast enough right now to flip the race.
- All Maricopa County-level results can be found here.
If there are any changes tomorrow, I'll update...
...In the race for US Senate, R Jeff Flake's lead over D Rich Carmona has grown to a little over 76K vote. The tiniest spark of hope that existed that this race would turn around is fading.
...In CD1, D Ann Kirkpatrick's lead over R Jonathan Paton now stands at 6246 votes, which is down 18 votes from yesterday. Still seems like she is going to hang on here.
...In CD2, D Ron Barber's lead over R Martha McSally stands at 289 votes. As with yesterday's report, this one is still far too close to call.
...In CD9, D Kyrsten Sinema's lead over R Vernon Parker stands at 4710 votes, an increase of 642 votes. The trend and the margin still favor Sinema here; it isn't over, but this contest is on the clock.
...In LD28, D Eric Meyer has opened up a 907-vote lead over R Amanda Reeve for the 2nd House seat in the district, an increase of 224 votes. This race isn't over, but the trend favors Meyer.
- All state-level results can be found here.
...In the race for CAWCD (the board of directors of the Central Arizona Project), the race for the fifth and final seat that is up for election has flipped, with Heather Macre opening up a 977 vote lead over Jean McGrath. Yesterday, McGrath was ahead by 94 votes.
...In the race for Maricopa County Sheriff, R Joe Arpaio's lead over D Paul Penzone has closed to a still-daunting 84025. That's a decrease of 1645 votes, but the pace of change isn't nearly fast enough right now to flip the race.
- All Maricopa County-level results can be found here.
If there are any changes tomorrow, I'll update...
A few pictures from the 2012 election cycle
 |
| State Sen. David Schapira addressing a crowd of voters in Tempe in January while he was exploring a run for Congress. He finished the primary in 2nd place. |
 |
| From March: The CD5 delegates to the Democratic National Convention, (L-R) Janie Hydrick, Chase Williams, Laura Copple, Jerry Gettinger, Lauren Kuby, and Randy Keating |
 |
| Paul Penzone, candidate for Maricopa County Sheriff, speaking at an event in Tempe |
 |
| At the same April event, the future LD26 legislative team - (L-R, standing) Reps-elect Juan Mendez and Andrew Sherwood and Sen.-elect Ed Ableser |
 |
| Mark Mitchell in April, the future Mayor of Tempe. He emerged victorious in Tempe's election in May. |
 |
| Andrei Cherny, candidate for Congress, addressing a meeting of the LD24 Democrats; he finished third in the primary. |
 |
| In July, putting up signs |
 |
| In July, an overflow crowd at Changing Hands Bookstore in Tempe for a Congressional primary forum |
 |
| Congressional candidate Kyrsten Sinema at the July forum. She emerged from the primary as the nominee. |
 |
| Not political or anything to do with the election cycle; I just like the sign. |
 |
| In August, Harry Mitchell addressing a crowd at an event in Tempe |
 |
| September: Future state rep. Juan Mendez speaking at the LD26 campaign office in Tempe |
.jpg) |
| US Senate candidate Rich Carmona speaking to a supporter at the same Tempe event in September |
 |
| The "crowd" at the Clean Elections debate for LD24 legislative candidates in September |
 |
| In September, future State Rep. Andrew Sherwood (standing) greeting friends in Tempe in September |
 |
| Kyrsten Sinema addressing the crowd at the same Tempe event in September |
.jpg) |
| Election Day: watching early national returns at the Arizona Democratic Party headquarters in Phoenix |
 |
| Election Day: The crowd gathering at the Renaissance watching election night coverage on CNN |
 |
| Election night: Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton speaking to the hundreds gathered at the Renaissance |
 |
| The jublilant crowd as the election is called for President Obama |
All of the above pics were taken by me and represent just the tiniest portion of the effort and energy and dedication of the 2012 election cycle. Similar scenes and more took place across the state all year, and while a guy with a camera may not have been at each place, they were all a part of the successes of the cycle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)