Saturday, February 16 - A Democratic "Day of Action"/Campaign Kick-Off House Party at the home of State Representative David Schapira. After a day of walking, knocking, talking and registering voters, join David and his seatmate, Rep. Ed Ableser, at the party that kicks off their re-election campaign.
Time: 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.
Place: 3633 S. Hazelton Ln., Tempe, AZ 85282
Note - for info on D17 Day of Action activities, contact LD17 Chair Doug Mings at dougmings[at]gmail.com.
Tuesday, February 19 - Monthly meeting of the Arizona chapter of the National Democratic Jewish Council. A Democratic candidate TBD will be the featured speaker.
Time: 7:00 p.m.
Location: Country Inn Suites, 89th Place and Shea, Scottsdale
Thursday, February 21 - The Big Picture Film Series presents the documentary "Can Mr. Smith Get To Washington Anymore?". Join David Malsch, the LD17 Democrats, LD18 Democrats, and the ASU Young Dems in watching this fast-paced, engaging, and enlightening look at the 2006 campaign for a U.S. Senate seat waged by supreme underdog Jeff Smith.
Time: 7:30 p.m.
Place: ASU's Coor Building, Room 170
975 S. Myrtle Ave., Tempe
Admission: Free, open to the public
Thursday, February 21 - At its regular meeting, Scottsdale's Transportation Commission will consider, and seek public input on, future route expansions for Scottsdale's Neighborhood Connector Trolley service. The Neighborhood Connector Trolley serves south Scottsdale, and the proposed expansions are also in south Scottsdale.
Time: 6:00 p.m.
Place: City Hall Kiva
3939 Drinkwater Blvd., Scottsdale
Friday, February 29 - Join Congressman Harry Mitchell for the LD17 Fundraiser and Party celebrating that, for the first time, Democrats outnumber Republicans in D17!
Time: 6:30 p.m.
Place: The home of Lauren and Mike Kuby
109 E. Loma Vista Dr., Tempe
(Click here for a map)
Donation: $25 ($15 for Young Dems); Click here to donate, and then email Lauren at laurenkuby[at]gmail.com to let her know that you paid online.
Saturday, March 1 - MCDP County Convention
Time: Training sessions start at 9:00 a.m.; the meeting starts at 1:00 p.m.
Location: Plumbers and Steamfitters Union
3109 North 24th Street, Phoenix
Sunday, March 9 - D8 Fundraiser at Ostrovsky’s Fine Art Gallery. Join Congressman Harry Mitchell and the LD8 Democrats for an afternoon of Art, Jazz, and Political Talk.
Time: 3:00 p.m. until 5:00 p.m.
Place: 7048 E. Main St., Scottsdale
Donation: $35
Info: phone (480) 596-8350 or email d8office[at]d8dems.phxcoxmail.com
Thursday, February 14, 2008
The U.S. House issues contempt citations;
and the House Republicans have a meltdown and abandon the Constitution and their posts.
And they moved to adjourn the House during the memorial service for Congressman Tom Lantos (D-CA).
After a rather brief debate (an hour), the House passed H. Res. 982, "Providing for the adoption of the resolution (H. Res. 979) recommending that the House of Representatives find Harriet Miers and Joshua Bolten, Chief of Staff, White House, in contempt of Congress for refusal to comply with subpoenas duly issued by the Committee on the Judiciary and for the adoption of the resolution (H. Res. 980) authorizing the Committee on the Judiciary to initiate or intervene in judicial proceedings to enforce certain subpoenas."
The motions arise from the White House's assertion of executive privilege in denying Congressional investigators access to documents relevant to the U.S. Attorney firings scandal.
The Republican side of the debate was marked both by protests that the rule under consideration (HRes982) meant that there would be limited debate on the actual contempt motions (HRes979 and HRes980) and by protests that the House was considering this before passage of a FISA update bill (S. 2248).
The Reps claimed that a failure to rush through passage of S2248 (with its retroactive immunity for telecommunications providers) would result in the expiration of the FISA act, leaving America open to terrorist attack.
They lied.
What would expire is nothing more than the Protect America Act that was passed last August (coverage here, here, and here) with its provisions that allow for warrantless electronic surveillance of foreign terror suspects and Americans suspected of being associated with them.
FISA wouldn't be affected (it'll still be in force) and any active investigations engaged in under the August law can continue for a year, even if the law that enabled such investigations does expire.
Anyway, back to the main topic and the reason for the title of this post, after minority leader John Boehner (R-OH) spoke his piece, calling the day's events political grandstanding (among other things), he called on all Republicans in the House to walk out in protest.
In case one thinks that the move was nothing more than an impulsive move borne of frustration with not getting their way, House Republicans walked off the floor, straight into...
...a well-planned press conference on the steps of the Capitol, where they were able to repeat their tale of impending disaster without interference from little things like time limits or opposition.
Perhaps they hope that their flamboyant outrage over the lack of immediate consideration of S2248 would mask the real story of what happened today.
For the first time during the 110th Congress, the House Democrats showed a little spine.
The Republicans' near-total absence from the House floor didn't change the final outcome - the motion passed 223 - 32, with AZ Democratic Reps Giffords, Grijalva, Mitchell, and Pastor voting 'aye' and AZ Republican Reps Flake, Franks, Renzi, and Shadegg not voting.
The highlight of the debate (such as it was) was when the Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY), chair of the House Rules Committee, quoted a statement from the Congressional Record, dated May 21, 1998 -
The aforementioned John Boehner. :))
AP coverage here.
The Hill's coverage here.
Edit to add the one AZ flavor of the day:
Almost forgot - later in the afternoon, after all votes had been taken and legislative business had been completed, a number of Republicans, including Louis Gohmert, Ted Poe and Tom Price, strode to the well of the House and gave short speeches excoriating the Democrats for failing to pass an extension of the Protect America Act. They were followed immediately by AZ2's own Trent Franks, who spent his time bemoaning
Abortion.
Suggested campaign slogan for Rep. Franks - "Trent Franks - Your One Trick Pony".
End edit...
And they moved to adjourn the House during the memorial service for Congressman Tom Lantos (D-CA).
After a rather brief debate (an hour), the House passed H. Res. 982, "Providing for the adoption of the resolution (H. Res. 979) recommending that the House of Representatives find Harriet Miers and Joshua Bolten, Chief of Staff, White House, in contempt of Congress for refusal to comply with subpoenas duly issued by the Committee on the Judiciary and for the adoption of the resolution (H. Res. 980) authorizing the Committee on the Judiciary to initiate or intervene in judicial proceedings to enforce certain subpoenas."
The motions arise from the White House's assertion of executive privilege in denying Congressional investigators access to documents relevant to the U.S. Attorney firings scandal.
The Republican side of the debate was marked both by protests that the rule under consideration (HRes982) meant that there would be limited debate on the actual contempt motions (HRes979 and HRes980) and by protests that the House was considering this before passage of a FISA update bill (S. 2248).
The Reps claimed that a failure to rush through passage of S2248 (with its retroactive immunity for telecommunications providers) would result in the expiration of the FISA act, leaving America open to terrorist attack.
They lied.
What would expire is nothing more than the Protect America Act that was passed last August (coverage here, here, and here) with its provisions that allow for warrantless electronic surveillance of foreign terror suspects and Americans suspected of being associated with them.
FISA wouldn't be affected (it'll still be in force) and any active investigations engaged in under the August law can continue for a year, even if the law that enabled such investigations does expire.
Anyway, back to the main topic and the reason for the title of this post, after minority leader John Boehner (R-OH) spoke his piece, calling the day's events political grandstanding (among other things), he called on all Republicans in the House to walk out in protest.
In case one thinks that the move was nothing more than an impulsive move borne of frustration with not getting their way, House Republicans walked off the floor, straight into...
...a well-planned press conference on the steps of the Capitol, where they were able to repeat their tale of impending disaster without interference from little things like time limits or opposition.
Perhaps they hope that their flamboyant outrage over the lack of immediate consideration of S2248 would mask the real story of what happened today.
For the first time during the 110th Congress, the House Democrats showed a little spine.
The Republicans' near-total absence from the House floor didn't change the final outcome - the motion passed 223 - 32, with AZ Democratic Reps Giffords, Grijalva, Mitchell, and Pastor voting 'aye' and AZ Republican Reps Flake, Franks, Renzi, and Shadegg not voting.
The highlight of the debate (such as it was) was when the Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY), chair of the House Rules Committee, quoted a statement from the Congressional Record, dated May 21, 1998 -
Mr. Speaker, the American people have entrusted the President of the United States with many exclusive privileges not available to the average person. Because of the travel demands that he bears as the leader of the free world, he has got the privilege of traveling across the world on Air Force One; because of his need for constant security as the leader of our government, he has the privilege of round-the-clock protection from the Secret Service, even after he leaves office; and because of the need for national security, he is entrusted with a special privilege, probably more sacred than any of these, and that is executive privilege.The Congresscritter who proclaimed such reverence for open government, the rule of law, and the Constitution and its checks and balances?
Let us be perfectly clear, Mr. Speaker. The President has the right to claim executive privilege in matters of national security. But no one has the privilege of being above the law; not Members of this House, not Members of the other body, not even the Chief Executive of the United States of America. But it seems that this important privilege is being used to block the people's right to know on a much broader range of issues.
Mr. Speaker, I think there is a pattern developing in the Executive Branch. While reassuring the public that they are anxious to get to the truth, certain officials have consistently stood in the way of legitimate legal inquiries into activities of our government at the White House.
Just yesterday, in fact, a White House spokesman bluntly claimed that the administration has fully cooperated with Congressional questions about these very troubling technology transfers to China. It was a reassuring thing to hear, but it just was not true.
Congressional leaders from the Committee on National Security and from the Committee on International Relations have written the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State and the Director of the U.S. Arms Control Agency, and the chairman of the Committee on Intelligence wrote to the Secretary of Defense as well. Our Committee on Science, both Democrats and Republicans, have raised the issue of China with NASA. Even a letter sent to the President by the Speaker and the Majority Leader of the Senate has fallen on defense ears. To date, all of these requests have been met with either silence or reassurance. But all requests for information have been denied.
Mr. Speaker, it is time for the stonewall tactics to end and the cooperating to begin. Whether it is stalling on basic requests for information or invoking executive privilege, the result is the same; the American people are denied the right to know what is going on inside their White House. In the end, Mr. Speaker, this is what this fight is about, the American people's right to know what happens in their government.
This government does not belong to politicians in Washington D.C. This government belongs to the American people, and they have a right to know what happens in Washington, D.C. They have a right to know what is going on in their White House.
I think the stonewalling should end, and the cooperating and the truth needs to be discovered.
The aforementioned John Boehner. :))
AP coverage here.
The Hill's coverage here.
Edit to add the one AZ flavor of the day:
Almost forgot - later in the afternoon, after all votes had been taken and legislative business had been completed, a number of Republicans, including Louis Gohmert, Ted Poe and Tom Price, strode to the well of the House and gave short speeches excoriating the Democrats for failing to pass an extension of the Protect America Act. They were followed immediately by AZ2's own Trent Franks, who spent his time bemoaning
Abortion.
Suggested campaign slogan for Rep. Franks - "Trent Franks - Your One Trick Pony".
End edit...
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Dilemmas, dilemmas
...the Arizona House Judiciary Committee, or something that came out of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee...hmmm....
Tomorrow (ok, probably later today as you read this), the Arizona House of Representatives' Committee on Judiciary will be considering the latest attempt at a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages, HCR2065.
Think of it as a Republican valentine to the socially ultra-conservative wing of the GOP.
The outcome of the hearing isn't in doubt - all six Republican members of the committee (Farnsworth, Driggs, Yarbrough, Konopnicki, Crandall, Adams) have signed on as sponsors or cosponsors of the bill.
In short, the final vote count won't be any closer than 6 - 4 favoring passage, assuming all committee members are in attendance.
I'm considering attending, if only to get some good quotes.
However, earlier this evening, I found out that the U.S. House is slated to consider contempt of Congress citations for White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers.
Think of it as a Congressional valentine to Bush. :)
Now *that* should be a fun debate; lots of good quotes, too. :))
The big difference is that there is a bit of doubt as to the outcome - some, including me, question whether certain House Democrats (think Blue Dogs) have the political spine necessary to do the right thing.
So the dilemma is: go to a suspense-free hearing to watch some local Republicans work some of their election-year mischief (mischief that may backfire on them, but more on that at a later date, like after this is officially on the fall ballot), or stay home and watch some DC Republicans (and Republicans-lite) try to defend the Bush administration's open contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law.
Note: The U.S. House's Judiciary Committee's report is here. I haven't read all of it, and I'm not going to - it's 862 pages long.
As you can tell from the phrasing in the above paragraph, I'm leaning toward watching the DC mess unfold.
The local Republicans are going to be rambunctious all year - it's an election year and they want to distract voters from the fact that they are doing as little as possible to responsibly balance the state's budget.
Note: Russell Pearce's plans to balance the budget by gutting KidsCare, AHCCCS, higher education, and K-12 school construction while blanketly gutting state revenue yet again doesn't qualify as 'responsible.'
'Ideological', but not 'responsible.'
Anyway, there's going to be plenty of opportunities for good quotes down at the state lege.
On the other hand, an actual debate and vote on contempt citations by the U.S. House could be one of the highlights of the year in DC.
After writing all of this down and looking at it, it's a pretty easy choice.
Later!
Tomorrow (ok, probably later today as you read this), the Arizona House of Representatives' Committee on Judiciary will be considering the latest attempt at a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages, HCR2065.
Think of it as a Republican valentine to the socially ultra-conservative wing of the GOP.
The outcome of the hearing isn't in doubt - all six Republican members of the committee (Farnsworth, Driggs, Yarbrough, Konopnicki, Crandall, Adams) have signed on as sponsors or cosponsors of the bill.
In short, the final vote count won't be any closer than 6 - 4 favoring passage, assuming all committee members are in attendance.
I'm considering attending, if only to get some good quotes.
However, earlier this evening, I found out that the U.S. House is slated to consider contempt of Congress citations for White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers.
Think of it as a Congressional valentine to Bush. :)
Now *that* should be a fun debate; lots of good quotes, too. :))
The big difference is that there is a bit of doubt as to the outcome - some, including me, question whether certain House Democrats (think Blue Dogs) have the political spine necessary to do the right thing.
So the dilemma is: go to a suspense-free hearing to watch some local Republicans work some of their election-year mischief (mischief that may backfire on them, but more on that at a later date, like after this is officially on the fall ballot), or stay home and watch some DC Republicans (and Republicans-lite) try to defend the Bush administration's open contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law.
Note: The U.S. House's Judiciary Committee's report is here. I haven't read all of it, and I'm not going to - it's 862 pages long.
As you can tell from the phrasing in the above paragraph, I'm leaning toward watching the DC mess unfold.
The local Republicans are going to be rambunctious all year - it's an election year and they want to distract voters from the fact that they are doing as little as possible to responsibly balance the state's budget.
Note: Russell Pearce's plans to balance the budget by gutting KidsCare, AHCCCS, higher education, and K-12 school construction while blanketly gutting state revenue yet again doesn't qualify as 'responsible.'
'Ideological', but not 'responsible.'
Anyway, there's going to be plenty of opportunities for good quotes down at the state lege.
On the other hand, an actual debate and vote on contempt citations by the U.S. House could be one of the highlights of the year in DC.
After writing all of this down and looking at it, it's a pretty easy choice.
Later!
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Supermarket management - defending Scottsdale's (and America's) sensibilities...
Non-political post ahead...
Yesterday, while going thru checkout at my local Fry's, I was asked for ID to verify that I was old enough to purchase an item that I had selected.
Was it cold medicine with pseudoephedrine? Nope, I don't have a cold or the flu (and apparently, I'm one of the few in Arizona who can say that. :) )
Was it cigarettes? Nope, I don't smoke.
Was it booze? Nope, I *do* drink, but do so very infrequently.
No, it wasn't any of those obvious choices.
So what was the item that so threatens the health and welfare of Arizona's children that I had to prove I was of age before the vigilant store management at the local Fry's supermarket would allow me to purchase it?
A freakin' Three Stooges DVD!!
I'm glad they were only concerned with chronological age, because if I had to prove sufficient emotional maturity if would have been more difficult, given that I was purchasing a freakin' Three Stooges DVD!!
:))
Later!
Yesterday, while going thru checkout at my local Fry's, I was asked for ID to verify that I was old enough to purchase an item that I had selected.
Was it cold medicine with pseudoephedrine? Nope, I don't have a cold or the flu (and apparently, I'm one of the few in Arizona who can say that. :) )
Was it cigarettes? Nope, I don't smoke.
Was it booze? Nope, I *do* drink, but do so very infrequently.
No, it wasn't any of those obvious choices.
So what was the item that so threatens the health and welfare of Arizona's children that I had to prove I was of age before the vigilant store management at the local Fry's supermarket would allow me to purchase it?
A freakin' Three Stooges DVD!!
I'm glad they were only concerned with chronological age, because if I had to prove sufficient emotional maturity if would have been more difficult, given that I was purchasing a freakin' Three Stooges DVD!!
:))
Later!
Shadegg caves to blogger criticism, announces retirement*
* = OK, his announcement probably has absolutely nothing to do with some of the recent criticisms that I've directed at him (here, here, and here).
It was still fun to write that headline. :))
On to the story, with a little bit of wild speculation added...
From the Arizona Republic -
Stacy at Arizona Congress Watch has the entire statement.
While speculation as to Shadegg's motivation for this announcement in the AZ blogosphere has run the gamut from "the ethics questions" (funnelling $10K from his leadership PAC to his campaign coffers) to "After 14 years in the Congress he's tired; too tired to keep dealing with being part of the minority caucus."
Others take a more practical view, wondering if Shadegg's move is a coordinated gambit with John McCain, with McCain resigning from his Senate seat and Shadegg running for that in the fall.
[Start wild speculation]
I'm leaning that way, just because it makes too much sense tactically -
1. Resigning from the Senate allows McCain to focus on running for President while the Democratic nominee (either Obama or Clinton) still has to jump off of the campaign trail to return to work. It also silences those (like me!) who have criticized McCain for all of the votes that he has missed.
2. By resigning now, it forces an election for the Senate seat on the fall ballot. If John McCain vacated his seat after winning the Presidency, that would give whoever Governor Napolitano appointed to the position two years to settle into the job, and while she would have to select a Republican, you can bet that one person she wouldn't select would be McCain's personally-annointed successor. This move would stop a Republican who is less partisan or more constituent-oriented than Shadegg from settling into the Senate seat and frustrating Republican Party "movers and shakers" (aka - insider wingnuts) in their efforts to get one of their own in the slot.
3. Shadegg is already perfectly positioned for a short campaign for Senate - he's got high name recognition, and nearly a million dollars in the bank already. No Republican or Democrat is set up for a statewide race this cycle.
Ways that this could hurt the Arizona Republicans:
1. The CD3 seat is now an 'open' one. Given the Rep registration advantage in the district (~50K), even in the face of Bob Lord's strong challenge, Shadegg was likely to retain his seat. Now it's all up in the air. While it's still early in the year, Lord has his campaign up and running smoothly; Republican candidates will be scrambling to put something together.
2. The names of a number of sitting state legislators have been floated as possible successors, including State Rep. Jim Weiers (speaker of the AZ House) and State Sen. Jim Waring.
The Republicans are faced with trying to retain control of the state lege in the face of voters' growing disenchantment with the way that the Reps have been doing things and in the face of a shrinking registration advantage. Their efforts at playing defense will be boosted by the presence of John McCain at the top of the ticket (higher Rep turnout to support their 'favorite son'). However, those same efforts will be undermined if a number of their legislative veterans pass on lege races to focus on a shot at moving up. Their bench strength will be sorely tested by having to defend an unexpectedly high number of open seats.
Note: I hope Weiers goes for it - even the worst case scenario for Democrats is an improvement for the state. If he goes for the CD3 seat, the best that can happen for him is that he wins the seat and goes from being a big fish in a small pond (Speaker of the AZ House) to being a small fish in a big pond (junior member of the minority caucus in the U.S. House.) And win or lose, if he goes for it, he's out of the AZ House and the state budget becomes that much easier to balance without his obstructionism.
Solving a second state budget crisis would give Governor Napolitano a huge boost in her (expected) run for the seat currently held by McCain in 2010.
Other speculation -
Of course, speculation that this is part of a coordinated move with McCain can only be fueled by the amount of time that Shadegg has spent campaigning for McCain, especially in South Carolina. Shadegg is one of the (many!) reasons that the McCain presidential campaign has been resurrected, going from "DOA" last year to "presumptive nominee" this year.
Another sign that this move may have been in the works for a while - at one point (many months ago), Sean Noble, Shadegg's chief of staff and likely candidate to replace Shadegg, was rumored to be interested in running against Democrat Harry Mitchell in CD5. Without much fanfare at the time, he declined to run in CD5. Could this plan have been simmering even then? Let's face facts - Shadegg will support Noble in any primary. In CD5, that wouldn't mean much; in CD3, it could put Noble over the top.
[End wild speculation]
Politicker AZ has all sorts of coverage of this at their site.
Greg at Espresso Pundit has an open thread for speculation on which Reps will run for Shadegg's seat here.
Tony C. at Wactivist has a speculation thread here; this one concerns the likelihood of Shadegg running for John McCain's U.S. Senate seat in the event of his resignation in order to focus on his campaign for President.
Most other AZ blogs (Dem and Rep) have something on this story (hey - it *is* the biggest news of the AZ campaign season thus far.)
It was still fun to write that headline. :))
On to the story, with a little bit of wild speculation added...
From the Arizona Republic -
Arizona Rep. Shadegg won't seek re-election to Congress
WASHINGTON - Saying he never intended to be a professional politician, Arizona Rep. John Shadegg announced Monday that he will not seek re-election to an eighth term in Congress.
Shadegg, who just weeks ago spoke confidently about his ability to win another term, said his decision was a personal one and was not spurred by concerns over his health or fear that he could lose his seat in November.
“The bottom line is that this is a personal decision between my family and me, about our dreams, goals, and ambitions,” he said in a statement.
Stacy at Arizona Congress Watch has the entire statement.
While speculation as to Shadegg's motivation for this announcement in the AZ blogosphere has run the gamut from "the ethics questions" (funnelling $10K from his leadership PAC to his campaign coffers) to "After 14 years in the Congress he's tired; too tired to keep dealing with being part of the minority caucus."
Others take a more practical view, wondering if Shadegg's move is a coordinated gambit with John McCain, with McCain resigning from his Senate seat and Shadegg running for that in the fall.
[Start wild speculation]
I'm leaning that way, just because it makes too much sense tactically -
1. Resigning from the Senate allows McCain to focus on running for President while the Democratic nominee (either Obama or Clinton) still has to jump off of the campaign trail to return to work. It also silences those (like me!) who have criticized McCain for all of the votes that he has missed.
2. By resigning now, it forces an election for the Senate seat on the fall ballot. If John McCain vacated his seat after winning the Presidency, that would give whoever Governor Napolitano appointed to the position two years to settle into the job, and while she would have to select a Republican, you can bet that one person she wouldn't select would be McCain's personally-annointed successor. This move would stop a Republican who is less partisan or more constituent-oriented than Shadegg from settling into the Senate seat and frustrating Republican Party "movers and shakers" (aka - insider wingnuts) in their efforts to get one of their own in the slot.
3. Shadegg is already perfectly positioned for a short campaign for Senate - he's got high name recognition, and nearly a million dollars in the bank already. No Republican or Democrat is set up for a statewide race this cycle.
Ways that this could hurt the Arizona Republicans:
1. The CD3 seat is now an 'open' one. Given the Rep registration advantage in the district (~50K), even in the face of Bob Lord's strong challenge, Shadegg was likely to retain his seat. Now it's all up in the air. While it's still early in the year, Lord has his campaign up and running smoothly; Republican candidates will be scrambling to put something together.
2. The names of a number of sitting state legislators have been floated as possible successors, including State Rep. Jim Weiers (speaker of the AZ House) and State Sen. Jim Waring.
The Republicans are faced with trying to retain control of the state lege in the face of voters' growing disenchantment with the way that the Reps have been doing things and in the face of a shrinking registration advantage. Their efforts at playing defense will be boosted by the presence of John McCain at the top of the ticket (higher Rep turnout to support their 'favorite son'). However, those same efforts will be undermined if a number of their legislative veterans pass on lege races to focus on a shot at moving up. Their bench strength will be sorely tested by having to defend an unexpectedly high number of open seats.
Note: I hope Weiers goes for it - even the worst case scenario for Democrats is an improvement for the state. If he goes for the CD3 seat, the best that can happen for him is that he wins the seat and goes from being a big fish in a small pond (Speaker of the AZ House) to being a small fish in a big pond (junior member of the minority caucus in the U.S. House.) And win or lose, if he goes for it, he's out of the AZ House and the state budget becomes that much easier to balance without his obstructionism.
Solving a second state budget crisis would give Governor Napolitano a huge boost in her (expected) run for the seat currently held by McCain in 2010.
Other speculation -
Of course, speculation that this is part of a coordinated move with McCain can only be fueled by the amount of time that Shadegg has spent campaigning for McCain, especially in South Carolina. Shadegg is one of the (many!) reasons that the McCain presidential campaign has been resurrected, going from "DOA" last year to "presumptive nominee" this year.
Another sign that this move may have been in the works for a while - at one point (many months ago), Sean Noble, Shadegg's chief of staff and likely candidate to replace Shadegg, was rumored to be interested in running against Democrat Harry Mitchell in CD5. Without much fanfare at the time, he declined to run in CD5. Could this plan have been simmering even then? Let's face facts - Shadegg will support Noble in any primary. In CD5, that wouldn't mean much; in CD3, it could put Noble over the top.
[End wild speculation]
Politicker AZ has all sorts of coverage of this at their site.
Greg at Espresso Pundit has an open thread for speculation on which Reps will run for Shadegg's seat here.
Tony C. at Wactivist has a speculation thread here; this one concerns the likelihood of Shadegg running for John McCain's U.S. Senate seat in the event of his resignation in order to focus on his campaign for President.
Most other AZ blogs (Dem and Rep) have something on this story (hey - it *is* the biggest news of the AZ campaign season thus far.)
Monday, February 11, 2008
Guest Column - right-wing smears of Democratic presidential candidates
In something of a coincidence, on the same day when I spent some time speaking to a coworker, trying to dispel some of the smears that are going around about Senator Barack Obama, I received this email, forwarded by Jerry Gettinger, president of the Arizona chapter of the National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC).
It is reprinted with permission. I've made a few formatting corrections to improve readability (for some reason, most apostrophes and hyphens came through as some weird symbol - ý.)
____________________________________________________________________
Dear Jerry:
They are at it again. You may have already received a few bogus emails making false claims about Senators Clinton, Obama and Edwards. The Right Wing Smear Machine is back, and they are starting early, hoping to use the Big Lie to undermine the eventual Democratic nominee.
In 2004, as you will recall, right wingers spread lies about Democratic nominee John Kerry. They lied about his outstanding service in Vietnam and started a word-of-mouth campaign in the Jewish community with a lie about his wife supporting Hamas. Likewise, the amount of misinformation the Right Wing spread about President Clinton and Vice President Gore is almost too numerous to recount.
This year, NJDC is determined to give our activists the tools to fight back ý and to fight back early. In this email, I have enclosed information that counters some specific charges that have been levied against Senators Obama, Edwards and Clinton. Please help us make it "viral" by forwarding it to friends, family, neighbors and colleagues.
In the coming days, NJDC will send around a printable fact-sheet [Note: that fact sheet is here.] on where the major Democratic candidates stand on Middle East issues.
***
Senator Obama
We have received several reports about dishonest emails circulating about Senator Obama, aimed at Jewish voters. The fact of the matter is, Senator Obama is a good friend of the Jewish Community. He is very popular in the Chicago Jewish Community (one of the most vibrant centers of Jewish life in the nation) and has made courting Jewish votes a priority in his presidential campaign. A recent profile about Senator Obama in the Jewish Telegraphic Agency explained: "What you might not hear is that the Illinois senator, who made history Thursday by winning the Democratic caucus in Iowa, has made Jewish leaders an early stop at every stage in his political career." (Click here for the full article.)
Some of the viral emails sent out about Obama claim that the Senator is anti-Israel. Such charges are off-base. Like the other Democratic candidates, Barack Obama is a strong supporter of the U.S.-Israel relationship. He has never cast a vote against the position of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Shmuel Rosner, the U.S. correspondent for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz writes that Senator Obama "is pro-Israel. Period." (Click here to read his entire blog post about Obama.)
Senator Obama told the audience at NJDC's 2007 Washington Conference, "When I am President, the United States will stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel in search of this peace, and in defense against those who seek its destruction." (Click here for a transcript and here for video.) Likewise, in March 2007, Senator Obama told an AIPAC audience in Chicago that he believes the U.S. must have "a clear and strong commitment to the security of Israel: our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy. That will always be my starting point" in approaching Middle East policy. Continued Obama: "And when we see all of the growing threats in the region: from Iran to Iraq to the resurgence of al-Qaeda to the reinvigoration of Hamas and Hezbollah, that loyalty and that friendship will guide me as we begin to lay the stones that will build the road that takes us from the current instability to lasting peace and security."
Senator Obama has been endorsed by several prominent supporters of Israel, including Jewish Congressman Robert Wexler of Florida, who wrote: "What has always struck me about Senator Obama - and this is one of the reasons I have endorsed his candidacy for the United States Presidency - is that a love for Israel and a desire to keep the Jewish people secure is evident not just in his work, but also in his heart." Another prominent supporter of Israel, distinguished financier Lester Crown, wrote: "As president, [Obama] will be the friend to Israel that we all want to see in the White House - stalwart in his defense of Israel's security, and committed to helping Israel achieve peace with its neighbors." (More coverage of Crown's endorsement and support for Obama in the Jewish community is available on the Haaretz blog, here.)
The New York Sun - hardly a bastion of support for Democrats - editorialized: "We're no shills for Mr. Obama, but these Republicans [who questioned the Senatorýs support for Israel] haven't checked their facts. At least by our lights, Mr. Obama's commitment to Israel, as he has articulated it so far in his campaign, is quite moving and a tribute to the broad, bipartisan support that the Jewish state has in America."
It is also worth noting that Senator Obama is an outspoken critic of Iran, who wrote legislation to make it easier for states to divest from Iranian holdings. (The legislation is being blocked by a Republican Senator.)
Another Republican smear campaign falsely claims Senator Obama was educated in a radical Muslim madrassa - a blatant lie. While Senator Obama's religion - he is Christian - should not matter in the Presidential election, setting the facts straight is important. We've seen terrible fear mongering by the right wing in the form of baseless attacks against Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison, a good public servant and a friend of Israel and the Jewish Community. Similar attacks seem to be sprouting up against Senator Obama although he is Christian.
If a friend or neighbor asks you about an email or internet rumor regarding Senator Obamaýs religious upbringing, here are some important things to tell him/her:
(1) CNN reports "Allegations that Sen. Barack Obama was educated in a radical Muslim school known as a ýmadrassaý are not accurate, according to CNN reporting." The complete report is available online here in a report entitled "CNN debunks false report about Obama."
(2) The false "madrassa" rumors were published in a right wing smear magazine owned by the same company that owns the ultra-conservative Washington Times. These are the same people who have printed numerous falsehoods about the Clintons through the years.
(3) The Obama campaign has a fact sheet on its website which serves as an excellent resource about his background and sets the record straight about his religion. While Obama's religion should not be a political issue, lying about a candidate's religion is noteworthy. The fact sheet explains that, despite lies saying otherwise, Obama "is not and has never been a Muslim." The fact sheet is available here.
Scurrilous emails have also been circulating which attempt to smear Senator Obama because a magazine associated with his church gave an award to Louis Farrakhan. In the response to inquiries about Farrakhan, Obama repudiated and decried Farrakhan and his anti-Semitism. He was praised by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) for so-doing.
ADL National Director Abraham Foxman released a statement saying: "We welcome Barack Obama's condemnation of the anti-Semitic rhetoric of Minister Louis Farrakhan, and his making clear that he did not agree with his church's decision to honor Farrakhan. Issues of racism and anti-Semitism must be beyond the bounds of politics. When someone close to a political figure shows sympathy and support for an individual who makes his name espousing bigotry, that political figure needs to distance himself from that decision. Senator Obama has done just that."
Newsweek debunked other falsehoods about Senator Obamaýs church, in an article posted at: http://www.newsweek.com/id/91424/output/print
The rhetoric in some of these viral emails about Obama is so over the top, that yesterday several leaders of national Jewish organizations signed on to a letter condemning the smear campaign being run against him. The signatories represent non-partisan organizations which do not endorse political candidates. In the letter, they wrote: "Of particular concern, over the past several weeks, many in our community have received hateful emails that use falsehood and innuendo to mischaracterize Senator Barack Obama's religious beliefs and who he is as a person" and "These tactics attempt to drive a wedge between our community and a presidential candidate based on despicable and false attacks and innuendo based on religion. We reject these efforts to manipulate members of our community into supporting or opposing candidates."
The signatories include William Daroff of United Jewish Communities, Nathan J. Diament of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, Abraham Foxman of Anti-Defamation League, Richard S. Gordon of the American Jewish Congress, David Harris of the American Jewish Committee, Rabbi Marvin Hier of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, Rabbi David Saperstein of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, Phyllis Snyder of the National Council of Jewish Women and Hadar Susskind of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs.
The letter can be viewed here.
Senator Clinton
Senator Hillary Clinton has long been a target for distortion, despite her outstanding record on issues ranging from education, to health care, to support for Israel. Despite her strong commitment to Israel and close kinship with the Jewish Community (a key reason she is tremendously popular with her New York constituents), right wing smears against her leadership continue.
Giuliani advisor Martin Kramer, for instance, wrote a disingenuous piece in the Jerusalem Post claiming that Senator Clinton's rhetoric on Israel contains code words hinting that she is not really a true friend of Israel. Of course there was no logic to anything he wrote, not a surprise given that Senator Clinton has worked overtime in support of Israel in the Senate.
I wrote an op-ed responding to Mr. Kramer, which is available on our blog, here. I would recommend sending these paragraphs to anyone who is tempted to believe a right wing smear of the Senator and her support for the Jewish state:
Before delving into the specific charges offered by Kramer, it is important to note that Senator Clinton has been a great supporter of Israel throughout her career, and is one of Israel's strongest friends in the US Senate. She led the charge for Red Cross recognition of Magen David Adom and has an impeccable voting record.
If Hillary were but a fair weather friend of Israel, as Kramer suggests, she surely would not enjoy the immense popularity she has seen in New York. One simply does not get re-elected in the Empire State with 67% of the vote if there is even a smidgeon of legitimate doubt about one's support for Israel.
Here is what the Orthodox newspaper, The Jewish Press, which opposed Clinton in 2000, wrote in support of her candidacy for re-election to the Senate in 2006: "As regards Israel, she has become an important supporter of the Jewish state both in public and, perhaps more importantly, behind the scenes. She is held in the highest regard by those who regularly plead Israel's cause in the halls of government. For those who initially were wary of her positions on Middle East issues - and we include ourselves in that category - Ms. Clinton has proved to be a pleasant and welcome surprise."
At NJDC's Washington Conference, Senator Clinton strongly affirmed that that the U.S. stands "with Israel because it is a beacon of democracy in a neighborhood that is shadowed by radicalism, extremism, despotism and terrorism," and that Israel's very existence is "a defiant rebuke to anti-Semitism." Her remarks were particularly well received by our members. (Click here for a transcript and here for video.)
The Senator's Israel position paper states, "from her first trip to Israel on New Year's Day in 1982 through her years as a U.S. Senator, Hillary Clinton has a long history of strong and steadfast leadership for the US-Israel relationship. Her connection to the State of Israel, which began when as the First Lady of Arkansas, she brought an innovative Israeli preschool education program to her state, has grown." It goes on to say that "Hillary recognizes that Israel is a most important strategic ally against the scourge of terrorism and radicalism. 'Israel,' she said, ýis not only a friend and ally for us; it is a beacon of what democracy can and should be."
Time and again, Senator Clinton comes forward to stand with Israel. In September, for instance, Senator Clinton voiced strong and eloquent support of Israel's decision to take out a Syrian weapons facility in September, asserting that "the Syrians apparently were putting together, and perhaps over some period of years, a nuclear facility, and the Israelis took it out," adding, "I strongly support that."
In a further example, Senator Clinton's office teamed with Palestinian Media Watch in February 2007 to release a study of anti-Israel language in Palestinian textbooks. Bold actions in support of Israel are the rule from Senator Clinton's office, not the exception.
And, as was previously alluded to, Senator Clinton was a leader in the successful efforts to push for recognition of Magen David Adom (Israel's Red Cross) into the International Red Cross movement, leading American Red Cross Chairwoman Bonnie McElveen-Hunter to comment: "In partnership with the American Red Cross, Senator Clinton has been a strong and engaged leader in support of Magen David Adom's acceptance into the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement."
Of course, it is important to remind anyone tempted to believe the right wing's rhetoric about Senator Clinton that her husband's administration was strongly supportive of Israel. To this day, former President Clinton continues to speak out on behalf of the U.S.-Israel relationship, notably taking former President Jimmy Carter to task for falsehoods in his book about the Middle East.
Senator Edwards
Right wingers have long sought to distort Senator Edwards' record. Last year, the right wing smear machine tried to spread a myth - strongly denied by the Edwards campaign - that claimed the Senator considered Israel the greatest threat to world peace. The Edwards campaign struck back hard, issuing a statement which NJDC blogged about in February. (Click here to view.) The statement said:
"Senator Edwards did not say nor does he believe that the greatest short-term threat to world peace is the possibility that Israel would bomb Iran's nuclear facilities. Senator Edwards said, as he has in the past, that Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon is one of the greatest short-term threats to world peace."
Edwards spoke eloquently about the Iranian threat to the Herzliya conference in Israel. During the conference he remarked that "for years, the U.S. hasn't done enough to deal with what I have seen as a threat from Iran" and that "to ensure that Iran never gets nuclear weapons, we need to keep ALL options on the table. Let me reiterate - ALL options must remain on the table."
Addressing Herzliya, Edwards said that the U.S.-Israel relationship is a "bond that can never be broken." He also spoke about his dedication to Israel at NJDCýs Washington Conference. (Click here for video and here for a transcript.) One need just read this portion of his remarks to understand that this man loves Israel, understands her challenges and stands firmly with her people:
I know how important our relationship with Israel is.
I have been on extraordinarily emotional trips to Israel myself which have been very important to me. Tonight as many of you know in Israel a flag will be raised on Mt. Herzl to commemorate what happened in 1948 when members of Israel's provisional government signed a declaration of independence in Tel Aviv and celebrating Israel's independence is a wonderful historic moment for Israel. The nation is flourishing, the economy is doing very well. Israel continues to face, as many of you know very well, extraordinary threats to her people and security every single day.
I think there is a renewed need for vigilance. I was in Israel last summer --- in fact a few of the people who I was in Israel with are here tonight. We met with the Prime Minister, other Israeli leaders, and the Cabinet. We travelled to the northern border with Lebanon. This was about a month before the fighting broke out. This was one of my visits to Israel, all of which have had independent meaning for me.
On my first trip, we left the King David Hotel and left for Tel Aviv, and a few hours later the Sbarro Pizza bombing took place, which many of you will remember. Many died, including children.
On the campaign trail, Senator Edwards has sharply criticized the Bush Administration for proposing a $20 billion weapons sale to Saudi Arabia and other Arab states and has pledged to take a tougher stance toward the Saudis than President Bush in the White House. He was a sharp critic of the Saudi government on the 2004 campaign trail as well, remarking, "Whether it's Iraq or terrorism, the Saudis have fallen way short of what they need to be doing." (More info is available in a USA Today article, which is available here.)
Senator Edwards was very clear about his commitment to Israel during his 2004 debate with Vice President Cheney, declaring, "the Israeli people not only have the right to defend themselves, they should defend themselves. They have an obligation to defend themselves." He also reiterated his support for a tougher policy on Saudi Arabia and tough efforts to hold Iran accountable: "And I might add, it is very important for America to crack down on the Saudis who have not had a public prosecution for financing terrorism since 9/11. And it's important for America to confront the situation in Iran, because Iran is an enormous threat to Israel and to the Israeli people."
***
Attacks against our Democratic candidates must be countered with the facts. The earlier we start, the more powerful our pushback. I urge you to forward this message along to voters of all parties and political persuasions so we can stop the saliency of right wing attacks before it is too late. And, please send us any smear emails aimed at Jewish voters you receive so we can help debunk them.
Sincerely,
Ira N. Forman
Executive Director
National Jewish Democratic Council
PS. Please consider making a financial contribution to NJDC. Click here to contribute. And, click here to visit our blog!
____________________________________________________________________
It is reprinted with permission. I've made a few formatting corrections to improve readability (for some reason, most apostrophes and hyphens came through as some weird symbol - ý.)
____________________________________________________________________
Dear Jerry:
They are at it again. You may have already received a few bogus emails making false claims about Senators Clinton, Obama and Edwards. The Right Wing Smear Machine is back, and they are starting early, hoping to use the Big Lie to undermine the eventual Democratic nominee.
In 2004, as you will recall, right wingers spread lies about Democratic nominee John Kerry. They lied about his outstanding service in Vietnam and started a word-of-mouth campaign in the Jewish community with a lie about his wife supporting Hamas. Likewise, the amount of misinformation the Right Wing spread about President Clinton and Vice President Gore is almost too numerous to recount.
This year, NJDC is determined to give our activists the tools to fight back ý and to fight back early. In this email, I have enclosed information that counters some specific charges that have been levied against Senators Obama, Edwards and Clinton. Please help us make it "viral" by forwarding it to friends, family, neighbors and colleagues.
In the coming days, NJDC will send around a printable fact-sheet [Note: that fact sheet is here.] on where the major Democratic candidates stand on Middle East issues.
***
Senator Obama
We have received several reports about dishonest emails circulating about Senator Obama, aimed at Jewish voters. The fact of the matter is, Senator Obama is a good friend of the Jewish Community. He is very popular in the Chicago Jewish Community (one of the most vibrant centers of Jewish life in the nation) and has made courting Jewish votes a priority in his presidential campaign. A recent profile about Senator Obama in the Jewish Telegraphic Agency explained: "What you might not hear is that the Illinois senator, who made history Thursday by winning the Democratic caucus in Iowa, has made Jewish leaders an early stop at every stage in his political career." (Click here for the full article.)
Some of the viral emails sent out about Obama claim that the Senator is anti-Israel. Such charges are off-base. Like the other Democratic candidates, Barack Obama is a strong supporter of the U.S.-Israel relationship. He has never cast a vote against the position of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Shmuel Rosner, the U.S. correspondent for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz writes that Senator Obama "is pro-Israel. Period." (Click here to read his entire blog post about Obama.)
Senator Obama told the audience at NJDC's 2007 Washington Conference, "When I am President, the United States will stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel in search of this peace, and in defense against those who seek its destruction." (Click here for a transcript and here for video.) Likewise, in March 2007, Senator Obama told an AIPAC audience in Chicago that he believes the U.S. must have "a clear and strong commitment to the security of Israel: our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy. That will always be my starting point" in approaching Middle East policy. Continued Obama: "And when we see all of the growing threats in the region: from Iran to Iraq to the resurgence of al-Qaeda to the reinvigoration of Hamas and Hezbollah, that loyalty and that friendship will guide me as we begin to lay the stones that will build the road that takes us from the current instability to lasting peace and security."
Senator Obama has been endorsed by several prominent supporters of Israel, including Jewish Congressman Robert Wexler of Florida, who wrote: "What has always struck me about Senator Obama - and this is one of the reasons I have endorsed his candidacy for the United States Presidency - is that a love for Israel and a desire to keep the Jewish people secure is evident not just in his work, but also in his heart." Another prominent supporter of Israel, distinguished financier Lester Crown, wrote: "As president, [Obama] will be the friend to Israel that we all want to see in the White House - stalwart in his defense of Israel's security, and committed to helping Israel achieve peace with its neighbors." (More coverage of Crown's endorsement and support for Obama in the Jewish community is available on the Haaretz blog, here.)
The New York Sun - hardly a bastion of support for Democrats - editorialized: "We're no shills for Mr. Obama, but these Republicans [who questioned the Senatorýs support for Israel] haven't checked their facts. At least by our lights, Mr. Obama's commitment to Israel, as he has articulated it so far in his campaign, is quite moving and a tribute to the broad, bipartisan support that the Jewish state has in America."
It is also worth noting that Senator Obama is an outspoken critic of Iran, who wrote legislation to make it easier for states to divest from Iranian holdings. (The legislation is being blocked by a Republican Senator.)
Another Republican smear campaign falsely claims Senator Obama was educated in a radical Muslim madrassa - a blatant lie. While Senator Obama's religion - he is Christian - should not matter in the Presidential election, setting the facts straight is important. We've seen terrible fear mongering by the right wing in the form of baseless attacks against Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison, a good public servant and a friend of Israel and the Jewish Community. Similar attacks seem to be sprouting up against Senator Obama although he is Christian.
If a friend or neighbor asks you about an email or internet rumor regarding Senator Obamaýs religious upbringing, here are some important things to tell him/her:
(1) CNN reports "Allegations that Sen. Barack Obama was educated in a radical Muslim school known as a ýmadrassaý are not accurate, according to CNN reporting." The complete report is available online here in a report entitled "CNN debunks false report about Obama."
(2) The false "madrassa" rumors were published in a right wing smear magazine owned by the same company that owns the ultra-conservative Washington Times. These are the same people who have printed numerous falsehoods about the Clintons through the years.
(3) The Obama campaign has a fact sheet on its website which serves as an excellent resource about his background and sets the record straight about his religion. While Obama's religion should not be a political issue, lying about a candidate's religion is noteworthy. The fact sheet explains that, despite lies saying otherwise, Obama "is not and has never been a Muslim." The fact sheet is available here.
Scurrilous emails have also been circulating which attempt to smear Senator Obama because a magazine associated with his church gave an award to Louis Farrakhan. In the response to inquiries about Farrakhan, Obama repudiated and decried Farrakhan and his anti-Semitism. He was praised by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) for so-doing.
ADL National Director Abraham Foxman released a statement saying: "We welcome Barack Obama's condemnation of the anti-Semitic rhetoric of Minister Louis Farrakhan, and his making clear that he did not agree with his church's decision to honor Farrakhan. Issues of racism and anti-Semitism must be beyond the bounds of politics. When someone close to a political figure shows sympathy and support for an individual who makes his name espousing bigotry, that political figure needs to distance himself from that decision. Senator Obama has done just that."
Newsweek debunked other falsehoods about Senator Obamaýs church, in an article posted at: http://www.newsweek.com/id/91424/output/print
The rhetoric in some of these viral emails about Obama is so over the top, that yesterday several leaders of national Jewish organizations signed on to a letter condemning the smear campaign being run against him. The signatories represent non-partisan organizations which do not endorse political candidates. In the letter, they wrote: "Of particular concern, over the past several weeks, many in our community have received hateful emails that use falsehood and innuendo to mischaracterize Senator Barack Obama's religious beliefs and who he is as a person" and "These tactics attempt to drive a wedge between our community and a presidential candidate based on despicable and false attacks and innuendo based on religion. We reject these efforts to manipulate members of our community into supporting or opposing candidates."
The signatories include William Daroff of United Jewish Communities, Nathan J. Diament of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, Abraham Foxman of Anti-Defamation League, Richard S. Gordon of the American Jewish Congress, David Harris of the American Jewish Committee, Rabbi Marvin Hier of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, Rabbi David Saperstein of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, Phyllis Snyder of the National Council of Jewish Women and Hadar Susskind of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs.
The letter can be viewed here.
Senator Clinton
Senator Hillary Clinton has long been a target for distortion, despite her outstanding record on issues ranging from education, to health care, to support for Israel. Despite her strong commitment to Israel and close kinship with the Jewish Community (a key reason she is tremendously popular with her New York constituents), right wing smears against her leadership continue.
Giuliani advisor Martin Kramer, for instance, wrote a disingenuous piece in the Jerusalem Post claiming that Senator Clinton's rhetoric on Israel contains code words hinting that she is not really a true friend of Israel. Of course there was no logic to anything he wrote, not a surprise given that Senator Clinton has worked overtime in support of Israel in the Senate.
I wrote an op-ed responding to Mr. Kramer, which is available on our blog, here. I would recommend sending these paragraphs to anyone who is tempted to believe a right wing smear of the Senator and her support for the Jewish state:
Before delving into the specific charges offered by Kramer, it is important to note that Senator Clinton has been a great supporter of Israel throughout her career, and is one of Israel's strongest friends in the US Senate. She led the charge for Red Cross recognition of Magen David Adom and has an impeccable voting record.
If Hillary were but a fair weather friend of Israel, as Kramer suggests, she surely would not enjoy the immense popularity she has seen in New York. One simply does not get re-elected in the Empire State with 67% of the vote if there is even a smidgeon of legitimate doubt about one's support for Israel.
Here is what the Orthodox newspaper, The Jewish Press, which opposed Clinton in 2000, wrote in support of her candidacy for re-election to the Senate in 2006: "As regards Israel, she has become an important supporter of the Jewish state both in public and, perhaps more importantly, behind the scenes. She is held in the highest regard by those who regularly plead Israel's cause in the halls of government. For those who initially were wary of her positions on Middle East issues - and we include ourselves in that category - Ms. Clinton has proved to be a pleasant and welcome surprise."
At NJDC's Washington Conference, Senator Clinton strongly affirmed that that the U.S. stands "with Israel because it is a beacon of democracy in a neighborhood that is shadowed by radicalism, extremism, despotism and terrorism," and that Israel's very existence is "a defiant rebuke to anti-Semitism." Her remarks were particularly well received by our members. (Click here for a transcript and here for video.)
The Senator's Israel position paper states, "from her first trip to Israel on New Year's Day in 1982 through her years as a U.S. Senator, Hillary Clinton has a long history of strong and steadfast leadership for the US-Israel relationship. Her connection to the State of Israel, which began when as the First Lady of Arkansas, she brought an innovative Israeli preschool education program to her state, has grown." It goes on to say that "Hillary recognizes that Israel is a most important strategic ally against the scourge of terrorism and radicalism. 'Israel,' she said, ýis not only a friend and ally for us; it is a beacon of what democracy can and should be."
Time and again, Senator Clinton comes forward to stand with Israel. In September, for instance, Senator Clinton voiced strong and eloquent support of Israel's decision to take out a Syrian weapons facility in September, asserting that "the Syrians apparently were putting together, and perhaps over some period of years, a nuclear facility, and the Israelis took it out," adding, "I strongly support that."
In a further example, Senator Clinton's office teamed with Palestinian Media Watch in February 2007 to release a study of anti-Israel language in Palestinian textbooks. Bold actions in support of Israel are the rule from Senator Clinton's office, not the exception.
And, as was previously alluded to, Senator Clinton was a leader in the successful efforts to push for recognition of Magen David Adom (Israel's Red Cross) into the International Red Cross movement, leading American Red Cross Chairwoman Bonnie McElveen-Hunter to comment: "In partnership with the American Red Cross, Senator Clinton has been a strong and engaged leader in support of Magen David Adom's acceptance into the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement."
Of course, it is important to remind anyone tempted to believe the right wing's rhetoric about Senator Clinton that her husband's administration was strongly supportive of Israel. To this day, former President Clinton continues to speak out on behalf of the U.S.-Israel relationship, notably taking former President Jimmy Carter to task for falsehoods in his book about the Middle East.
Senator Edwards
Right wingers have long sought to distort Senator Edwards' record. Last year, the right wing smear machine tried to spread a myth - strongly denied by the Edwards campaign - that claimed the Senator considered Israel the greatest threat to world peace. The Edwards campaign struck back hard, issuing a statement which NJDC blogged about in February. (Click here to view.) The statement said:
"Senator Edwards did not say nor does he believe that the greatest short-term threat to world peace is the possibility that Israel would bomb Iran's nuclear facilities. Senator Edwards said, as he has in the past, that Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon is one of the greatest short-term threats to world peace."
Edwards spoke eloquently about the Iranian threat to the Herzliya conference in Israel. During the conference he remarked that "for years, the U.S. hasn't done enough to deal with what I have seen as a threat from Iran" and that "to ensure that Iran never gets nuclear weapons, we need to keep ALL options on the table. Let me reiterate - ALL options must remain on the table."
Addressing Herzliya, Edwards said that the U.S.-Israel relationship is a "bond that can never be broken." He also spoke about his dedication to Israel at NJDCýs Washington Conference. (Click here for video and here for a transcript.) One need just read this portion of his remarks to understand that this man loves Israel, understands her challenges and stands firmly with her people:
I know how important our relationship with Israel is.
I have been on extraordinarily emotional trips to Israel myself which have been very important to me. Tonight as many of you know in Israel a flag will be raised on Mt. Herzl to commemorate what happened in 1948 when members of Israel's provisional government signed a declaration of independence in Tel Aviv and celebrating Israel's independence is a wonderful historic moment for Israel. The nation is flourishing, the economy is doing very well. Israel continues to face, as many of you know very well, extraordinary threats to her people and security every single day.
I think there is a renewed need for vigilance. I was in Israel last summer --- in fact a few of the people who I was in Israel with are here tonight. We met with the Prime Minister, other Israeli leaders, and the Cabinet. We travelled to the northern border with Lebanon. This was about a month before the fighting broke out. This was one of my visits to Israel, all of which have had independent meaning for me.
On my first trip, we left the King David Hotel and left for Tel Aviv, and a few hours later the Sbarro Pizza bombing took place, which many of you will remember. Many died, including children.
On the campaign trail, Senator Edwards has sharply criticized the Bush Administration for proposing a $20 billion weapons sale to Saudi Arabia and other Arab states and has pledged to take a tougher stance toward the Saudis than President Bush in the White House. He was a sharp critic of the Saudi government on the 2004 campaign trail as well, remarking, "Whether it's Iraq or terrorism, the Saudis have fallen way short of what they need to be doing." (More info is available in a USA Today article, which is available here.)
Senator Edwards was very clear about his commitment to Israel during his 2004 debate with Vice President Cheney, declaring, "the Israeli people not only have the right to defend themselves, they should defend themselves. They have an obligation to defend themselves." He also reiterated his support for a tougher policy on Saudi Arabia and tough efforts to hold Iran accountable: "And I might add, it is very important for America to crack down on the Saudis who have not had a public prosecution for financing terrorism since 9/11. And it's important for America to confront the situation in Iran, because Iran is an enormous threat to Israel and to the Israeli people."
***
Attacks against our Democratic candidates must be countered with the facts. The earlier we start, the more powerful our pushback. I urge you to forward this message along to voters of all parties and political persuasions so we can stop the saliency of right wing attacks before it is too late. And, please send us any smear emails aimed at Jewish voters you receive so we can help debunk them.
Sincerely,
Ira N. Forman
Executive Director
National Jewish Democratic Council
PS. Please consider making a financial contribution to NJDC. Click here to contribute. And, click here to visit our blog!
____________________________________________________________________
Saturday, February 09, 2008
God, I love typos
Of course, if it isn't a typo, I'll be changing my registration to 'Independent.'
From the Arizona Clean Elections Commission list of 2008 Participating Candidates (emphasis added)-
I just knew that there was a non-climatalogical reason that metro Phoenix was so cold on Monday (we even had a hail storm here in Scottsdale) -
Hell froze over!
LOL
Later!
From the Arizona Clean Elections Commission list of 2008 Participating Candidates (emphasis added)-
Office/District Last First Party
Senate 04 Harper Jack Dem
I just knew that there was a non-climatalogical reason that metro Phoenix was so cold on Monday (we even had a hail storm here in Scottsdale) -
Hell froze over!
LOL
Later!
Friday, February 08, 2008
Breaking news: 2008 Republican Campaign Platform Discovered
OK, OK, not really - this is just me being a wiseass... :)
For the first time in recent memory, they'll be running on an "us versus them" platform.
Well, for the first time since the last election, anyway.
They can't run on the economy - it's tanking, hard.
They can't run on fiscal responsibility - a run of record budget deficits sort of blocks that tactic.
They can't run on the war in Iraq - it's a quagmire (and John McCain's "we'll be there for a hundred years" doesn't really help them there.)
They can't run as the great protectors of liberty and the "American way" - the Patriot Act and FISA expansion (among other things) stop them there.
They can't run as the party of integrity - check out the list of Republicans facing investigation or indictment.
Education? The environment? You're kidding, right?
Nope, pretty much all that's left is that old reliable, demonizing an amorphous 'them', in this case, immigrants.
Just this week, Senate Republicans temporarily blocked an economic stimulus bill over concerns that some undocumented immigrants might receive rebate checks.
One question was left unanswered in their proclamations of heroic effort to protect the faltering U.S. economy from stimulation by anyone other than taxpayers who are in the U.S. legally -
How could an undocumented immigrant get on the list of intended recipients of rebate checks, other than by being on the list of taxpayers in the first place?
The fact that many, perhaps most, undocumented immigrants pay taxes is a fact that the nativists within and without Congress want Americans to ignore.
It's rhetorically inconvenient.
Congressional Republicans aren't reserving their anti-immigrant efforts to 'big' bills exclusively - they trot out their emnity for immigrants even on 'small' bills.
On HR4137, the College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2007, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) proposed two (2!) amendments targeted at immigrants (here and here); no single-minded bigot he, Rep. King's third proposed amendment (here) targeted affirmative action.
Of course, it's not just Congressional Republicans - there are at least 15 anti-immigrant proposals before the Arizona legislature alone, and countless others across the county ('countless' because I don't have the patience to navigate the websites of 50 state legislatures trying to find the actual number. :) )
On the presidential campaign side, John McCain's biggest remaining obstacle in his quest for the Republican nomination is that the far-right wing of his party doesn't consider him to be conservative enough.
Never mind that he supports legislatively overriding Roe vs Wade, whole-heartedly supports Bush's Forever War, and supports continued tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and large corporations.
Their problem with McCain is that he doesn't work up a strong enough hatred for immigrants.
Expect him to move to the right (a little bit, anyway) to appease them: more importantly, expect many of the down-ballot Rep candidates this year to make immigrant-bashing the main plank of their campaign platforms.
They have nothing else left to campaign on.
Nothing positive, anyway.
For the first time in recent memory, they'll be running on an "us versus them" platform.
Well, for the first time since the last election, anyway.
They can't run on the economy - it's tanking, hard.
They can't run on fiscal responsibility - a run of record budget deficits sort of blocks that tactic.
They can't run on the war in Iraq - it's a quagmire (and John McCain's "we'll be there for a hundred years" doesn't really help them there.)
They can't run as the great protectors of liberty and the "American way" - the Patriot Act and FISA expansion (among other things) stop them there.
They can't run as the party of integrity - check out the list of Republicans facing investigation or indictment.
Education? The environment? You're kidding, right?
Nope, pretty much all that's left is that old reliable, demonizing an amorphous 'them', in this case, immigrants.
Just this week, Senate Republicans temporarily blocked an economic stimulus bill over concerns that some undocumented immigrants might receive rebate checks.
One question was left unanswered in their proclamations of heroic effort to protect the faltering U.S. economy from stimulation by anyone other than taxpayers who are in the U.S. legally -
How could an undocumented immigrant get on the list of intended recipients of rebate checks, other than by being on the list of taxpayers in the first place?
The fact that many, perhaps most, undocumented immigrants pay taxes is a fact that the nativists within and without Congress want Americans to ignore.
It's rhetorically inconvenient.
Congressional Republicans aren't reserving their anti-immigrant efforts to 'big' bills exclusively - they trot out their emnity for immigrants even on 'small' bills.
On HR4137, the College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2007, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) proposed two (2!) amendments targeted at immigrants (here and here); no single-minded bigot he, Rep. King's third proposed amendment (here) targeted affirmative action.
Of course, it's not just Congressional Republicans - there are at least 15 anti-immigrant proposals before the Arizona legislature alone, and countless others across the county ('countless' because I don't have the patience to navigate the websites of 50 state legislatures trying to find the actual number. :) )
On the presidential campaign side, John McCain's biggest remaining obstacle in his quest for the Republican nomination is that the far-right wing of his party doesn't consider him to be conservative enough.
Never mind that he supports legislatively overriding Roe vs Wade, whole-heartedly supports Bush's Forever War, and supports continued tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and large corporations.
Their problem with McCain is that he doesn't work up a strong enough hatred for immigrants.
Expect him to move to the right (a little bit, anyway) to appease them: more importantly, expect many of the down-ballot Rep candidates this year to make immigrant-bashing the main plank of their campaign platforms.
They have nothing else left to campaign on.
Nothing positive, anyway.
Well, Tim Bee's priorities are clear...
And LD30, CD8, and all of Arizona should note:
Serving the people who he was elected to represent *isn't* his first priority.
From the AZ Republic -
Senate leader is MIA; may be campaigning
It's turning into the legislative version of Where's Waldo: Where is Senate President Tim Bee?
The top official in the state Senate has been gone the past two days, prompting questions and quiet grumbling from fellow lawmakers that Bee is distracted by his congressional campaign.
Bee did not return a phone call seeking information about his Senate absences.
The story goes on to highlight how the members of the state senate are both supportive of Bee (stonewalling questions of his whereabouts) and restive over the Senate's lack of activity on many issues, not the least of which is the state's budget crisis.
Perhaps somebody should tell Senator Bee that maybe he should rethink the wisdom of seeking a promotion by abandoning his current job.
More on this story from the AZ Rep's Political Insider here.
Thursday, February 07, 2008
Here and there - elections notes
...The numbers are incomplete because not every county has posted early voting (EV) results on their websites (or, in Navajo County's case, the results are given in an almost unreadable format), but the pattern is clear - Hillary Clinton won in Arizona because of early votes.
In the five counties for which I could find clear data (Cochise, Maricopa, Pima, Yavapai, and Yuma), Clinton had a clear advantage in early votes over Barack Obama. In fact, her EV advantage in Maricopa County, 20,790, exceeded her total advantage in the county, 18,170.
Not sure what it means, other than that every campaign involved in the fall elections is paying attention.
...Early votes helped Clinton/hurt Obama in another way - John Edwards received over 21,000 votes, the vast majority of them early votes. Most of the Edwards supporters that I know switched their support to Obama when Edwards dropped out. Most of those that didn't were like me in that they couldn't switch because they had already voted.
Depending on where they came from, the 21,000 votes that Edwards received might have garnered Obama one or two more delegates. In a race this close, that might make the difference.
...Barack Obama won two counties (Coconino and Yavapai) and one Congressional District (CD5),
...Note that I haven't used the word "lose" when describing the results, because neither one lost anything in Arizona. According to the Arizona Democratic Party, Clinton won 26 Arizona delegates on Tuesday; Obama won 20.
...However, the MSM hasn't been so picky about using the word "loser" in relation to Tuesday's results. It's a strong word that attracts eyes, but considering that most of the Democratic primaries/caucuses award delegates on a proportional basis, it's also a lazy word.
...In addition to the usual descriptions of one or another candidate "winning" or "losing" a state, the word "loser" has been used to describe various endorsers of Senator Obama, such as Arizona's own Governor Janet Napolitano.
From the Washington Post's The Fix (thanks to the AZ Rep's Political Insider for pointing this out) -
Janet Napolitano: The Arizona governor went out on a limb to back Obama and was featured in the Illinois senator's closing ads in the state. In the end, however, Napolitano wasn't able to deliver her state for Obama, a high-profile setback for a politician with clear aspirations for a spot on the national ticket.
She may not have "delivered" the state, but even if the Obama had received the most votes ("winning" the state), Arizona's delegates are awarded proportionally. Winning the state only means a couple of additional delegates.
Of more significance is the fact that Obama went from 14% support in November (according to this Rocky Mountain Poll) to over 41% in February 5th's election.
That change probably doubled, possibly tripled, Obama's Arizona delegate count.
Governor Napolitano may not have "delivered" the state, but states don't matter in this race, delegates do.
...While the MSM tries to spin Tuesday's results as a win for Clinton, it seems that many people disagree - for week's the Obama campaigning has been receiving more donations than the Clinton campaign, including *after* Tuesday. Of course, no matter what the various spin doctors have to say, Clinton realizes how tight the race really is - she's loaned her campaign over $5 million dollars.
Stay tuned...
...On a more local note, the AZ Republic has endorsed Corey Woods, Rhett Wilson, and Julie Jakubek in the race for Tempe City Council. Congrats to all three on the endorsements.
Note - early voting in Tempe's election started today.
Later!
In the five counties for which I could find clear data (Cochise, Maricopa, Pima, Yavapai, and Yuma), Clinton had a clear advantage in early votes over Barack Obama. In fact, her EV advantage in Maricopa County, 20,790, exceeded her total advantage in the county, 18,170.
Not sure what it means, other than that every campaign involved in the fall elections is paying attention.
...Early votes helped Clinton/hurt Obama in another way - John Edwards received over 21,000 votes, the vast majority of them early votes. Most of the Edwards supporters that I know switched their support to Obama when Edwards dropped out. Most of those that didn't were like me in that they couldn't switch because they had already voted.
Depending on where they came from, the 21,000 votes that Edwards received might have garnered Obama one or two more delegates. In a race this close, that might make the difference.
...Barack Obama won two counties (Coconino and Yavapai) and one Congressional District (CD5),
...Note that I haven't used the word "lose" when describing the results, because neither one lost anything in Arizona. According to the Arizona Democratic Party, Clinton won 26 Arizona delegates on Tuesday; Obama won 20.
...However, the MSM hasn't been so picky about using the word "loser" in relation to Tuesday's results. It's a strong word that attracts eyes, but considering that most of the Democratic primaries/caucuses award delegates on a proportional basis, it's also a lazy word.
...In addition to the usual descriptions of one or another candidate "winning" or "losing" a state, the word "loser" has been used to describe various endorsers of Senator Obama, such as Arizona's own Governor Janet Napolitano.
From the Washington Post's The Fix (thanks to the AZ Rep's Political Insider for pointing this out) -
Janet Napolitano: The Arizona governor went out on a limb to back Obama and was featured in the Illinois senator's closing ads in the state. In the end, however, Napolitano wasn't able to deliver her state for Obama, a high-profile setback for a politician with clear aspirations for a spot on the national ticket.
She may not have "delivered" the state, but even if the Obama had received the most votes ("winning" the state), Arizona's delegates are awarded proportionally. Winning the state only means a couple of additional delegates.
Of more significance is the fact that Obama went from 14% support in November (according to this Rocky Mountain Poll) to over 41% in February 5th's election.
That change probably doubled, possibly tripled, Obama's Arizona delegate count.
Governor Napolitano may not have "delivered" the state, but states don't matter in this race, delegates do.
...While the MSM tries to spin Tuesday's results as a win for Clinton, it seems that many people disagree - for week's the Obama campaigning has been receiving more donations than the Clinton campaign, including *after* Tuesday. Of course, no matter what the various spin doctors have to say, Clinton realizes how tight the race really is - she's loaned her campaign over $5 million dollars.
Stay tuned...
...On a more local note, the AZ Republic has endorsed Corey Woods, Rhett Wilson, and Julie Jakubek in the race for Tempe City Council. Congrats to all three on the endorsements.
Note - early voting in Tempe's election started today.
Later!
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Two facts becoming clear...
1. Mike Huckabee won the Republican Vice-Presidential nomination tonight - whoever wins the Rep nomination for President (and more and more, that's looking like McCain), they're going to need Huckabee's ability to deliver in the southern states.
2. Hillary Clinton can spin this as a big victory for her, but "it could have been worse" isn't really a "victory." Barack Obama has more momentum, and even if he doesn't win in California (it's too early to call as I'm writing this), he's walking away from Super Tuesday with a significant amount of delegates. Depending on super delegates, he may have the lead in delegate count.
This race is still so close that we could end up a convention that means something...
More after actual delegate counts are in....
2. Hillary Clinton can spin this as a big victory for her, but "it could have been worse" isn't really a "victory." Barack Obama has more momentum, and even if he doesn't win in California (it's too early to call as I'm writing this), he's walking away from Super Tuesday with a significant amount of delegates. Depending on super delegates, he may have the lead in delegate count.
This race is still so close that we could end up a convention that means something...
More after actual delegate counts are in....
TCE and Scottsdale's water: update on last month's contamination incident
The following is a long post, mostly of the 'copy and paste' variety, so let me summarize -
The Miller Road Treatment Facility remains shut down, and the EPA has ordered a full investigation. The EPA has requested a meeting with the Participating Companies (PCs) this week to discuss a number of options, including leaving the MRTF off-line as far as providing drinking water - it would just be a treatment facility aimed at controlling the spreading groundwater contamination plume. Other options include adding redundant systems.
I've copied and pasted where I could, but for some of it, I had to transcribe letters. I apologize for any typos (mostly misspellings) and take responsibility for those. However, there were a number of instances of poor grammar or awkward word choice. Those are the responsibility of the original writers.
If anyone is interested in the original email and attachments, drop a line to me at cpmaz[at]yahoo.com or contact Vicki Rosen at Rosen.Vicki[at]epamail.epa.gov to be added to her mailing list for the NIBW Community Involvement Group.
On to the actual post...
Vicki Rosen, the EPA's Community Involvement Coordinator, sent out an email yesterday regarding January's incident that affected approximately 5000 customers of Arizona American Water.
The message in its entirety (note: I adjusted the formatting and punctuation for readability, but made no content changes in copying the note or its attachments - except for editing out a couple of phone numbers) -
Hello CIG members,
I wanted to give you a quick update related to the failures at theMiller Road Treatment Facility (MRTF).
First, I've attached at the bottom of this page the Incident Report on the January failure which EPAreceived from the Participating Companies on January 23 and a letter EPA sent to Motorola on February 1. Second, I want to reiterate a few important points:
I will be back in touch with you all as I have more information. In addition, I'm developing a fact sheet for the entire NIBW mailing liston the incident and what's being done about it.
Best,
Vicki
(See attached file: Transmittal_J_Watt.012308.pdf)
(See attached file: MRTF.pdf)
The text of the letter from the NIBW participating companies -
January 23, 2008
Jamey Watt
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region IX (SFD-8-2)
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-3901
Re: Discharge of Groundwater Exceeding Treatment Standards from Miller
Road Treatment Facility
Dear Mr. Watt:
This letter is formal notification that a malfunction at Miller Road Treatment Facility (MRTF) resulted in discharge of groundwater to the Paradise Valley Arsenic Treatment Facility (PVARF) that exceeded the treatment standard of 5 ug/l for trichloroethene (TCE). The equipment malfunction occurred on Tower 3 while treating groundwater extracted from well PCX-1. This notification complies with the seven-day written response requirement as specified in the North Indian Bend Wash Superfund Site Sitewide Operation and Maintenance Plan, dated June 15, 2006.
The blower on Tower 3 shutdown for unknown reasons at approximately 2:30 p.m. on Tuesday, January 15 after the operator had left MRTF for the day. The situation was detected on Wednesday, January 16 at approximately 6:30 a.m. when the operator returned to MRTF for his next shift. At approximately 6:45 a.m., the operator reset the control command and restarted the blower. The treatment train was shutdown at approximately 9:30 a.m. Arizona American Water notified the North Indian Bend Wash Participating Companies of the incident at approximately 10:00 a.m. Remedial Project Managers of Environmental Protection Agency and Arizona Department of Environmental Quality along with City of Scottsdale Water Department staff were contacted and verbally notified of the water quality incident on the same day.
Samples of water were immediately collected by AAW personnel at the MRTF and PVARF and submitted to Transwest Geochem, Inc. for rush analysis of NIBW chemicals of concern (COCs). Laboratory analysis of a sample collected from the MRTF effluent at approximately 9:00 a.m. on January 16 indicated a concentration of TCE at 15 Eg/l. A sample collected at approximately the same time at PVARF had a TCE concentration of 22 Eg/l.
Arizona American Water (AAW) has collected additional samples at PVARF and the Paradise Valley drinking water system. Those data have been submitted to and reviewed by EPA, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, and Maricopa County. AAW has performed extensive response actions and is in communication with their customers and the appropriate agencies regarding the incident.
Well PCX-1 and Tower 3 had been operating continuously without incident since December 14, 2007 following extensive start-up testing. An aggressive monitoring program since mid-December indicated that treated water from MRTF has met treatment standards for the NIBW COCs.
The MRTF control system includes five interlocks associated with blower operation. These interlocks are low air flow rate, high and low air pressure, blower high vibration, and blower status. Initial investigation into the incident has revealed that moisture in the tubing from the air flow rate element to the transmitter prevented the measurement to drop below the interlock set-point when the blower shutdown.
The pressure monitoring device had been replaced, but not fully integrated into the control system and therefore the interlock was not active. Failure of the control system to recognize that the blower had shutdown based on status is unclear at this time.
The MRTF control system also includes redundant operator notifications in the event of certain alarms and shutdowns. Neither of the notification systems responded to the blower shutdown and no notifications were made to alert the operator of the equipment malfunction. Further investigation and testing will be required to determine the exact reason why the blower shutdown in the first place; why the blower status parameter did not initiate an alarm and treatment train shutdown; and why the redundant operator notification systems did not work.
As you know, the MRTF will be under going a non-routine preventative maintenance rehabilitation beginning in February 2008. The rehabilitation activities at MRTF include replacing the packing in each tower and upgrades to instrumentation. Based on the instrumentation and control system malfunctions associated with this incident, the NIBW Participating Companies will also ensure that there is a detailed review and validation of the MRTF control system during the rehabilitation project and that upgrades recommended as a result of this review are implemented.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me.
Very truly yours,
Dennis H. Shirley, P.G.
The letter from the EPA to Motorola -
February 1, 2008
Mr. Michael Loch
Corporate Director, EHS Strategic Initiatives
Motorola Inc.
1303 East Algonquin Road, Mail Drop: 3rd floor
Schaumburg, Illinois 60196
Subject: Miller Road Treatment Facility, Indian Bend Wash Superfund Site, Phoenix, Arizona
Dear Mr. Loch:
The purpose of this letter is to convey the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) concerns regarding the October 2007 and January 2008 incidents at the Indian Bend Wash Miller Road Treatment Facility (MRTF) which have resulted in discharges of of groundwater in exceedence of the treatment standard of 5 ug/l for trichloroethene (TCE). These continued failures at the MRTF are unacceptable to EPA. We expect a full investigation into both incidents and an evaluation of a full range of options to ensure that failures never happen again.
While we are evaluating our enforcement options, our highest priority is to ensure that safe drinking water is provided to the residents of Scottsdale and Paradise Valley. Therefore, pursuant to the Consent Decree (CD), Motorola on behalf of the Participating Companies (PCs) may not restart the treatment plant until all levels of government are confident that the system will provide clean drinking water and approval is formally granted by EPA, the State, and Maricopa County.
The first failure at the plant, which occurred during a planned maintenance event sometime between October 9, 2007 and October 17, 2007, resulted in incomplete remediation of the the groundwater at the MRTF. The effluent water from MRTF was sampled on October 15, 2007 and the result was 9.3 ug/l of TCE. This water then traveled to the Paradise Valley Arsenic Removal Facility (PVARF) where it was blended with water from other sources at a ratio of approximately 1 to 3 before entering the distribution system. Based on this blending, we project that the water served to the public was below the 5 ug/l MCL for TCE.
Upon learning of this plant failure, EPA and Arizona Department of Environment Quality (ADEQ) began an investigation of the incident which included meeting with the PCs and Arizona American Water on December 17, 2007. During our meeting, Motorola could not fully explain what happened at the Plant during this incident but they assured us that this was an isolated incident resulting from maintenance work being conducted at the plant. We were told that MRTF was to undergo a full rehabilitation that would result in performance improvements. EPA sent a letter to the PCs on December 14, 2007 requesting additional information needed to complete our assessment of the incident. In this December 2007 letter, we outlined short-term and long-term procedural requirements for MRTF to ensure that this type of incident did not reoccur during maintenance events. The PCs responded in a January 4, 2008 letter but did not commit to any procedural or equipment modification as requested. It is unclear at this time if the procedures could have prevented the second incident from occurring because of the uncertainties surrounding both incidents. However, we will conduct a full evaluation of all of the possible interim measures and long-term options taking into account information learned from both failures at the Plant.
A second malfunction at the plant occurred on January 15, 2008. The PCs contacted EPA upon discovery of the equipment malfunction and provided formal notification in a letter dated January 23, 2008. The equipment malfunction occurred on Tower 3 which is used to treat groundwater from PCX-1. The most recent sampling results from PCX1 show TCE concentrations at approximately 70 ug/l. No operator was present at the Plant when the malfunction occurred and the notification systems and alarms failed to function properly. As a result, water from PCX-1 was discharged from MRTF without treatment from 2:30 pm on January 15, 2008 until 6:30 am on January 16, 2008 when the operator returned to the Plant. No samples were collected from the MRTF or PVARF effluents when the malfunction was discovered at 6:30 am. The operator reset the control command and restarted the blower at 6:45 am. The system operated properly from 6:45 am until it was shut down entirely at 9:30 am. The MRTF effluent was sampled at 9:30 am, several hours after the system had been restarted, and TCE was detected at 15 ug/l. The PVARF effluent was sampled at the same time and TCE was detected at 22 ug/l. The PCs indicated that they, along with Arizona American Water, did examine flow conditions during the 16 hour period of the malfunction and based on their calculations believe that the 22 ug/l TCE detected in the PVARF effluent is likely representative of the TCE concentration that entered the drinking water system.
It is the responsibility and legal obligation of the PCs to ensure that the groundwater remedy selected at the NIBW site meets the water quality standards established in the Record of Decision. At this time, the EPA is not confident that the MRTF will completely remediate the groundwater as currently designed or that procedural changes can be put in place sufficient to ensure that a similar incident does not occur in the future. At the same time, both EPA and the State are concerned that if the system remains off too long the plume may spread and impact surrounding wells.
We request a meeting between EPA, ADEQ, and the PCs the week of February 4, 2008 to discuss implementation of interim measures necessary to capture the plume and the process of evaluating the long term options. Interim measures would involve pumping and treating the contaminated groundwater, but not yet serving the treated groundwater as drinking water. Interim measures will give us the time to thoroughly evaluate long term options.
Finally, we request that the PCs respond to the attachment by Feb 22, 2008. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Sheryl Bilbrey at (xxx) xxx - xxxx or myself at (xxx) xxx - xxxx.
Sincerely,
Keith Takata
Director, Superfund Division
Attachment to EPA's letter -
Concurrent with developing responses to this attachment, EPA and the State request a meeting with the PCs, the week of February 4, 2008 to discuss interim measures to pump and treat the contaminated groundwater but not yet serve the treated groundwater as drinking water. While the interim measures are in place, we will have the time to thoroughly sidcuss and carefully decide long term options as described in the last section of this attachment.
The January 23, 2008 letter provides some information regarding the plant failure, however there is addition information required under Section 8.2 of the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) plan that was not included. Specifically, information regarding the person who discovered the malfunction must be provided. We also request that all electronic data from the plant be retained.
Compliance requirements for Consideration as part of the Overall Comprehensive Evaluation of the MRTF for Long Term Operation
EPA formally issued a response to the October 15, 2007 incident on December 14, 2007 outlining short-term and long-term compliance requirements associated with the overall operation of the MRTF, "start-up" sampling requirements, bi-weekly sampling, and notification requirements. Attachment 2 of the letter also included short term requirements for a detailed engineering evaluation of the Tower 2.
The recent failure of Tower 3 warrants a revision to this response letter to include a detailed engineering evaluation on the entire MRTF plant and associated groundwater extraction wells. As a result, the PCs must implement the following requirements in addition to the requirements outlined in the December 14, 2007 response letter to address the long term operation of MRTF. This includes at a minimum, addressing the following key issues:
* A detailed engineering evaluation of Towers 1, 2, and 3. This evaluation should be based on the original design of the MRTF as a basis of comparison. This evaluation should also include the extraction wells and their associated mechanical, electrical, instrumentation, and control systems.
* Provide a detailed work plan for an engineering evaluation of the entire MRTF facility and extraction well systems. This work plan should include a comprehensive and rigorous evaluation and assessment of key equipment, instrumentation and control systems similar in scope to an initial plant start up after construction (e.g. each instrumentation element and control loop is tested individually as well as part of an overall system). As part of the detailed engineering evaluation, trend analysis for all the measured operating and status parameters on the PLC should be done to better understand what caused the system components to fail and what repairs are necessary.
The work plan should also include review and reassessment of all operation and maintenance plans and associated procedures and protocols to validate that operation and maintenance procedures and functions are being properly implemented. Perform all necessary maintenance on Towers 1, 2, and 3 and extraction wells to reflect original design specifications. We suggest the following procedures should be incorporated into the operation and maintenance plan: 1) conduct monthly inspections of these Towers and extraction well systems to check compliance with operational and maintenance plan requirements. Provide a summary report of these observations. Inspections should include verifying alarm conditions and operational response for a non-compliant condition, 2) continue bi-weekly sampling at each of the Tower effluents for a minimum period of 30 days after each of the Towers is compliant with its efficacy. During start-up of each Tower, daily samples with fast turn-around-time should be considered at least for the first 5 days of operation, then switch to bi-weekly sampling as discussed above.
Evaluation of Remedy
Prior to MRTF shutdown, the treated water was discharged to the Paradise Valley Arsenic Removal Facility (PVARF) to be further discharged to either the drinking water supply or the canal depending upon the compliance requirements at the PVARF. We have requested an immediate discussion of interim measures we believe these additional long-term options must also be evaluated:
* Re-injection: Re-inject water back into the aquifer after it is treated at the MRTF. This option would require installation of new injection wells.
* Discharge to Canal: Discharge all treated water at the MRTF to the canal at the PVARF indefinitely.
* Operate More Towers at Reduced Capacity: Operate at least two towers at approximately half capacity each instead of just one tower at near full capacity. In this scenario, if one system were to fail, the effluent contaminant exceedance of the downstream composite water (one-half treated + one-half not treated) would be reduced significantly by about 50 percent.
* Redundant Treatment: Reconfigure the plant plumbing to put two towers in series and use the second tower as a redundant treatment to the first tower. Both towers would have to fail in order to cause a release of untreated water. This alternative would be in addition to the recommended compliance requirements noted above.
* Secondary Treatment: Use Liquid Granular Activated Carbon (LGAC) to treat the groundwater after the air strippers to remove any remaining TCE. This system will serve as a redundant system after the air strippers.
* Continuous VOC Monitoring: Installation of a VOC monitoring sensor to monitor TCE concentrations at a higher sampling frequency. This option would simply detect any TCE exceedances in the effluent of the air strippers. If a TCE exceedance is encountered, then interlocks connecting to the sensor would be programmed to shut the entire system down.
The Miller Road Treatment Facility remains shut down, and the EPA has ordered a full investigation. The EPA has requested a meeting with the Participating Companies (PCs) this week to discuss a number of options, including leaving the MRTF off-line as far as providing drinking water - it would just be a treatment facility aimed at controlling the spreading groundwater contamination plume. Other options include adding redundant systems.
I've copied and pasted where I could, but for some of it, I had to transcribe letters. I apologize for any typos (mostly misspellings) and take responsibility for those. However, there were a number of instances of poor grammar or awkward word choice. Those are the responsibility of the original writers.
If anyone is interested in the original email and attachments, drop a line to me at cpmaz[at]yahoo.com or contact Vicki Rosen at Rosen.Vicki[at]epamail.epa.gov to be added to her mailing list for the NIBW Community Involvement Group.
On to the actual post...
Vicki Rosen, the EPA's Community Involvement Coordinator, sent out an email yesterday regarding January's incident that affected approximately 5000 customers of Arizona American Water.
The message in its entirety (note: I adjusted the formatting and punctuation for readability, but made no content changes in copying the note or its attachments - except for editing out a couple of phone numbers) -
Hello CIG members,
I wanted to give you a quick update related to the failures at theMiller Road Treatment Facility (MRTF).
First, I've attached at the bottom of this page the Incident Report on the January failure which EPAreceived from the Participating Companies on January 23 and a letter EPA sent to Motorola on February 1. Second, I want to reiterate a few important points:
EPA has ordered a complete investigation into the causes of the incidents.
EPA has ordered a thorough evaluation of all options to ensure that it never happens again.
The treatment plant will remain shut down until EPA, the State and the County are satisfied it will operate safely.
Fines and penalties under the Consent Decree and Safe Drinking Water Act are likely down the road, but for now our highest priority is to ensure clean drinking water to the public.
EPA will review notification procedures that are in place to determine if they are adequate or need to be revised.
Below is information the Arizona American Water Company sent to its customers regarding the exposure the public may have received during the most recent event: U.S. EPA advises that due to the short term duration of the exposure, the public should not experience and adverse health [sic] affects from tap water that was consumed in the 24 hour period prior to notification and shutting down the system. This would apply to both children and adults consuming up to 6 liters of water per day when TCE levels may have exceeded federal drinking water standards.
Nonetheless, residents with concerns regarding their particular health condition should consult their medical provider. The EPA has shared the sampling data on which this information is based with the ADEQ and Maricopa County.
I will be back in touch with you all as I have more information. In addition, I'm developing a fact sheet for the entire NIBW mailing liston the incident and what's being done about it.
Best,
Vicki
(See attached file: Transmittal_J_Watt.012308.pdf)
(See attached file: MRTF.pdf)
The text of the letter from the NIBW participating companies -
January 23, 2008
Jamey Watt
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region IX (SFD-8-2)
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-3901
Re: Discharge of Groundwater Exceeding Treatment Standards from Miller
Road Treatment Facility
Dear Mr. Watt:
This letter is formal notification that a malfunction at Miller Road Treatment Facility (MRTF) resulted in discharge of groundwater to the Paradise Valley Arsenic Treatment Facility (PVARF) that exceeded the treatment standard of 5 ug/l for trichloroethene (TCE). The equipment malfunction occurred on Tower 3 while treating groundwater extracted from well PCX-1. This notification complies with the seven-day written response requirement as specified in the North Indian Bend Wash Superfund Site Sitewide Operation and Maintenance Plan, dated June 15, 2006.
The blower on Tower 3 shutdown for unknown reasons at approximately 2:30 p.m. on Tuesday, January 15 after the operator had left MRTF for the day. The situation was detected on Wednesday, January 16 at approximately 6:30 a.m. when the operator returned to MRTF for his next shift. At approximately 6:45 a.m., the operator reset the control command and restarted the blower. The treatment train was shutdown at approximately 9:30 a.m. Arizona American Water notified the North Indian Bend Wash Participating Companies of the incident at approximately 10:00 a.m. Remedial Project Managers of Environmental Protection Agency and Arizona Department of Environmental Quality along with City of Scottsdale Water Department staff were contacted and verbally notified of the water quality incident on the same day.
Samples of water were immediately collected by AAW personnel at the MRTF and PVARF and submitted to Transwest Geochem, Inc. for rush analysis of NIBW chemicals of concern (COCs). Laboratory analysis of a sample collected from the MRTF effluent at approximately 9:00 a.m. on January 16 indicated a concentration of TCE at 15 Eg/l. A sample collected at approximately the same time at PVARF had a TCE concentration of 22 Eg/l.
Arizona American Water (AAW) has collected additional samples at PVARF and the Paradise Valley drinking water system. Those data have been submitted to and reviewed by EPA, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, and Maricopa County. AAW has performed extensive response actions and is in communication with their customers and the appropriate agencies regarding the incident.
Well PCX-1 and Tower 3 had been operating continuously without incident since December 14, 2007 following extensive start-up testing. An aggressive monitoring program since mid-December indicated that treated water from MRTF has met treatment standards for the NIBW COCs.
The MRTF control system includes five interlocks associated with blower operation. These interlocks are low air flow rate, high and low air pressure, blower high vibration, and blower status. Initial investigation into the incident has revealed that moisture in the tubing from the air flow rate element to the transmitter prevented the measurement to drop below the interlock set-point when the blower shutdown.
The pressure monitoring device had been replaced, but not fully integrated into the control system and therefore the interlock was not active. Failure of the control system to recognize that the blower had shutdown based on status is unclear at this time.
The MRTF control system also includes redundant operator notifications in the event of certain alarms and shutdowns. Neither of the notification systems responded to the blower shutdown and no notifications were made to alert the operator of the equipment malfunction. Further investigation and testing will be required to determine the exact reason why the blower shutdown in the first place; why the blower status parameter did not initiate an alarm and treatment train shutdown; and why the redundant operator notification systems did not work.
As you know, the MRTF will be under going a non-routine preventative maintenance rehabilitation beginning in February 2008. The rehabilitation activities at MRTF include replacing the packing in each tower and upgrades to instrumentation. Based on the instrumentation and control system malfunctions associated with this incident, the NIBW Participating Companies will also ensure that there is a detailed review and validation of the MRTF control system during the rehabilitation project and that upgrades recommended as a result of this review are implemented.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me.
Very truly yours,
Dennis H. Shirley, P.G.
The letter from the EPA to Motorola -
February 1, 2008
Mr. Michael Loch
Corporate Director, EHS Strategic Initiatives
Motorola Inc.
1303 East Algonquin Road, Mail Drop: 3rd floor
Schaumburg, Illinois 60196
Subject: Miller Road Treatment Facility, Indian Bend Wash Superfund Site, Phoenix, Arizona
Dear Mr. Loch:
The purpose of this letter is to convey the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) concerns regarding the October 2007 and January 2008 incidents at the Indian Bend Wash Miller Road Treatment Facility (MRTF) which have resulted in discharges of of groundwater in exceedence of the treatment standard of 5 ug/l for trichloroethene (TCE). These continued failures at the MRTF are unacceptable to EPA. We expect a full investigation into both incidents and an evaluation of a full range of options to ensure that failures never happen again.
While we are evaluating our enforcement options, our highest priority is to ensure that safe drinking water is provided to the residents of Scottsdale and Paradise Valley. Therefore, pursuant to the Consent Decree (CD), Motorola on behalf of the Participating Companies (PCs) may not restart the treatment plant until all levels of government are confident that the system will provide clean drinking water and approval is formally granted by EPA, the State, and Maricopa County.
The first failure at the plant, which occurred during a planned maintenance event sometime between October 9, 2007 and October 17, 2007, resulted in incomplete remediation of the the groundwater at the MRTF. The effluent water from MRTF was sampled on October 15, 2007 and the result was 9.3 ug/l of TCE. This water then traveled to the Paradise Valley Arsenic Removal Facility (PVARF) where it was blended with water from other sources at a ratio of approximately 1 to 3 before entering the distribution system. Based on this blending, we project that the water served to the public was below the 5 ug/l MCL for TCE.
Upon learning of this plant failure, EPA and Arizona Department of Environment Quality (ADEQ) began an investigation of the incident which included meeting with the PCs and Arizona American Water on December 17, 2007. During our meeting, Motorola could not fully explain what happened at the Plant during this incident but they assured us that this was an isolated incident resulting from maintenance work being conducted at the plant. We were told that MRTF was to undergo a full rehabilitation that would result in performance improvements. EPA sent a letter to the PCs on December 14, 2007 requesting additional information needed to complete our assessment of the incident. In this December 2007 letter, we outlined short-term and long-term procedural requirements for MRTF to ensure that this type of incident did not reoccur during maintenance events. The PCs responded in a January 4, 2008 letter but did not commit to any procedural or equipment modification as requested. It is unclear at this time if the procedures could have prevented the second incident from occurring because of the uncertainties surrounding both incidents. However, we will conduct a full evaluation of all of the possible interim measures and long-term options taking into account information learned from both failures at the Plant.
A second malfunction at the plant occurred on January 15, 2008. The PCs contacted EPA upon discovery of the equipment malfunction and provided formal notification in a letter dated January 23, 2008. The equipment malfunction occurred on Tower 3 which is used to treat groundwater from PCX-1. The most recent sampling results from PCX1 show TCE concentrations at approximately 70 ug/l. No operator was present at the Plant when the malfunction occurred and the notification systems and alarms failed to function properly. As a result, water from PCX-1 was discharged from MRTF without treatment from 2:30 pm on January 15, 2008 until 6:30 am on January 16, 2008 when the operator returned to the Plant. No samples were collected from the MRTF or PVARF effluents when the malfunction was discovered at 6:30 am. The operator reset the control command and restarted the blower at 6:45 am. The system operated properly from 6:45 am until it was shut down entirely at 9:30 am. The MRTF effluent was sampled at 9:30 am, several hours after the system had been restarted, and TCE was detected at 15 ug/l. The PVARF effluent was sampled at the same time and TCE was detected at 22 ug/l. The PCs indicated that they, along with Arizona American Water, did examine flow conditions during the 16 hour period of the malfunction and based on their calculations believe that the 22 ug/l TCE detected in the PVARF effluent is likely representative of the TCE concentration that entered the drinking water system.
It is the responsibility and legal obligation of the PCs to ensure that the groundwater remedy selected at the NIBW site meets the water quality standards established in the Record of Decision. At this time, the EPA is not confident that the MRTF will completely remediate the groundwater as currently designed or that procedural changes can be put in place sufficient to ensure that a similar incident does not occur in the future. At the same time, both EPA and the State are concerned that if the system remains off too long the plume may spread and impact surrounding wells.
We request a meeting between EPA, ADEQ, and the PCs the week of February 4, 2008 to discuss implementation of interim measures necessary to capture the plume and the process of evaluating the long term options. Interim measures would involve pumping and treating the contaminated groundwater, but not yet serving the treated groundwater as drinking water. Interim measures will give us the time to thoroughly evaluate long term options.
Finally, we request that the PCs respond to the attachment by Feb 22, 2008. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Sheryl Bilbrey at (xxx) xxx - xxxx or myself at (xxx) xxx - xxxx.
Sincerely,
Keith Takata
Director, Superfund Division
Attachment to EPA's letter -
MRTF Attachment
Responses to be submitted to EPA by Feb 22, 2008.
Concurrent with developing responses to this attachment, EPA and the State request a meeting with the PCs, the week of February 4, 2008 to discuss interim measures to pump and treat the contaminated groundwater but not yet serve the treated groundwater as drinking water. While the interim measures are in place, we will have the time to thoroughly sidcuss and carefully decide long term options as described in the last section of this attachment.
The January 23, 2008 letter provides some information regarding the plant failure, however there is addition information required under Section 8.2 of the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) plan that was not included. Specifically, information regarding the person who discovered the malfunction must be provided. We also request that all electronic data from the plant be retained.
Compliance requirements for Consideration as part of the Overall Comprehensive Evaluation of the MRTF for Long Term Operation
EPA formally issued a response to the October 15, 2007 incident on December 14, 2007 outlining short-term and long-term compliance requirements associated with the overall operation of the MRTF, "start-up" sampling requirements, bi-weekly sampling, and notification requirements. Attachment 2 of the letter also included short term requirements for a detailed engineering evaluation of the Tower 2.
The recent failure of Tower 3 warrants a revision to this response letter to include a detailed engineering evaluation on the entire MRTF plant and associated groundwater extraction wells. As a result, the PCs must implement the following requirements in addition to the requirements outlined in the December 14, 2007 response letter to address the long term operation of MRTF. This includes at a minimum, addressing the following key issues:
* A detailed engineering evaluation of Towers 1, 2, and 3. This evaluation should be based on the original design of the MRTF as a basis of comparison. This evaluation should also include the extraction wells and their associated mechanical, electrical, instrumentation, and control systems.
* Provide a detailed work plan for an engineering evaluation of the entire MRTF facility and extraction well systems. This work plan should include a comprehensive and rigorous evaluation and assessment of key equipment, instrumentation and control systems similar in scope to an initial plant start up after construction (e.g. each instrumentation element and control loop is tested individually as well as part of an overall system). As part of the detailed engineering evaluation, trend analysis for all the measured operating and status parameters on the PLC should be done to better understand what caused the system components to fail and what repairs are necessary.
The work plan should also include review and reassessment of all operation and maintenance plans and associated procedures and protocols to validate that operation and maintenance procedures and functions are being properly implemented. Perform all necessary maintenance on Towers 1, 2, and 3 and extraction wells to reflect original design specifications. We suggest the following procedures should be incorporated into the operation and maintenance plan: 1) conduct monthly inspections of these Towers and extraction well systems to check compliance with operational and maintenance plan requirements. Provide a summary report of these observations. Inspections should include verifying alarm conditions and operational response for a non-compliant condition, 2) continue bi-weekly sampling at each of the Tower effluents for a minimum period of 30 days after each of the Towers is compliant with its efficacy. During start-up of each Tower, daily samples with fast turn-around-time should be considered at least for the first 5 days of operation, then switch to bi-weekly sampling as discussed above.
Evaluation of Remedy
Prior to MRTF shutdown, the treated water was discharged to the Paradise Valley Arsenic Removal Facility (PVARF) to be further discharged to either the drinking water supply or the canal depending upon the compliance requirements at the PVARF. We have requested an immediate discussion of interim measures we believe these additional long-term options must also be evaluated:
* Re-injection: Re-inject water back into the aquifer after it is treated at the MRTF. This option would require installation of new injection wells.
* Discharge to Canal: Discharge all treated water at the MRTF to the canal at the PVARF indefinitely.
* Operate More Towers at Reduced Capacity: Operate at least two towers at approximately half capacity each instead of just one tower at near full capacity. In this scenario, if one system were to fail, the effluent contaminant exceedance of the downstream composite water (one-half treated + one-half not treated) would be reduced significantly by about 50 percent.
* Redundant Treatment: Reconfigure the plant plumbing to put two towers in series and use the second tower as a redundant treatment to the first tower. Both towers would have to fail in order to cause a release of untreated water. This alternative would be in addition to the recommended compliance requirements noted above.
* Secondary Treatment: Use Liquid Granular Activated Carbon (LGAC) to treat the groundwater after the air strippers to remove any remaining TCE. This system will serve as a redundant system after the air strippers.
* Continuous VOC Monitoring: Installation of a VOC monitoring sensor to monitor TCE concentrations at a higher sampling frequency. This option would simply detect any TCE exceedances in the effluent of the air strippers. If a TCE exceedance is encountered, then interlocks connecting to the sensor would be programmed to shut the entire system down.
Vote today...
It's February 5, 2008, the date of Arizona's Presidential Preference Election.
If you haven't voted early, make sure you vote today - whatever your party affiliation.
The final nominees won't be chosen today, but it's likely that one candidate in each party will move a lot closer to being their party's nominee.
Be a part of history.
Vote today.
If you haven't voted early, make sure you vote today - whatever your party affiliation.
The final nominees won't be chosen today, but it's likely that one candidate in each party will move a lot closer to being their party's nominee.
Be a part of history.
Vote today.
Ten and ten
Sunday, the AZ Republic ran a story highlighting 10 of the more interesting bills before the Arizona Legislature. It was a decent enough story, if a little light on real substance or usable information.
The story, while it did have its good points, was also a very shallow one. 10 bills out of over 1100 filed? That's less than 1%, and the brief blurbs that the Rep wrote about the bills didn't even include basic info such as the name of the sponsor or whether or not the bill has been assigned to a committee.
So, with that serving as inspiration, here's my list of ten and ten - ten bad bills to watch, and ten good bills to watch. These aren't the only 10 bad bills, or the only 10 good bills; there's plenty more of both.
Note: in the interests of minimizing repetitiveness, no anti-immigrant or "let's balance the budget by cutting revenue" bills will be included. Those were covered pretty well in the Legislative Loon p0sts.
Ten bad bills -
...HB2096, a bill to create parental educational choice grants. Introduced by Reps. Biggs, Burges, and Murphy, and Sens. Gorman, Harper and Johnson.
After over 200 words rationalizing the need for such grants, and proclaiming that the bill's purposes are secular, the bill goes on to create a program that awards grants in the amounts of $3500 and $4500 per year payable to the "custodians" of pupils enrolled at private schools.
Undermining public education is bad enough to warrant inclusion on this list, but the language in the bill that states that schools "shall not be required to alter its creed, practices or curriculum in order to redeem grants issued pursuant to this article" is a very thinly-veiled way to funnel public funds to religious schools, notwithstanding the "secular" proclamation a the beginning of the bill.
...HB2477, a bill relating to employees of the state treasurer's office. Sponsored by Rep. Adams. Would authorize the state treasurer (currently Dean Martin) to randomly drug test employees and prospective employees, and to periodically snoop into employees' credit reports.
If Mr. Martin and his water-carrier Rep. Adams believe that there is a drug use problem in the treasurer's office, there are provisions in existing state law that would allow for drug testing in departments where there is evidence of a problem. Even if those provisions don't apply to the treasurer's office, why not change the law so that those provisions *do* apply?
Unless, of course, the underlying purpose of the program would be to control and intimidate office employees, some of whom may have spoken up over the crimes committed by previous treasurer David Petersen, who resigned in disgrace.
Something tells me that the ethically-challenged Martin wants to discourage whistle-blowers with this.
...SB1054, a bill relating to the state treasurer and independent legal counsel. Introduced by Sen. Chuck Gray. Would allow the State Treasurer's office to bypass the Attorney General and contract for outside legal counsel. The bill also exempts such contracts from the state's procurement code with its attendent oversights.
Related: SB1097, a bill from Sen. Burns to exempt the State Treasurer's office from the Government Information Technology Agency's (GITA) requirements.
Can you say "building an independent fiefdom"?
...HB2678, a bill related to welfare recipients and applicants, and drug testing. Sponsored or cosponsored by a cast of thousands (actually, a cast of 31, 30 of whom are Republicans.) Would mandate drug testing of all applicants and recipients of public assistance.
...HB2713, a bill relating to students' expression of religion. Sponsored by Reps. Clark and Anderson. Would bar a school from discriminating against a student or group of students on the basis of religion. The bill includes interesting phrasing - "If an assignment requires a student's viewpoint to be expressed in coursework, artwork or other written or oral assignments, A public educational institution shall not penalize or reward a student on the basis of religious content or a religious viewpoint." I'm not sure of this (I'm most definitely not a lawyer), but I think this might really mess up grading in science classes.
This bill may be related to conflicts like this one in the Deer Valley Unified School District, chronicled in the AZ Republic.
...HCR2041, an amendment to the state constitution barring preferential treatment based on "race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education or public contracting." Sponsored by Reps. Pearce, Barnes, Mason, Murphy, and Nelson and Senators Harper and Johnson. Basically, this is Ward Connerly's scheme to end affirmative action policies.
...SB1064, a bill relating to presidential preference elections. Sponsored by Sens. Harper and Waring. This is the one that opens up presidential primaries for everyone but Democrats. I've written about this one before.
SB1332, a bill relating to DNA testing. Sponsored by Sen. Chuck Gray. The Senator was all people who are arrested to submit to DNA testing. Compliance would be a condition of bail or "own recognizance" release - failure to comply would result in revocation of bail.
Just think - if this was in force when Joe Arpaio and Andrew Thomas tried to intimidate the New Times into silence, not only would the two journalists they arrested have had to submit DNA samples, it would now be incumbent on them to petition a court to have their DNA info removed from the state's database (as opposed to Arpaio and Thomas having to justify keeping it.)
If the esteemed members of the lege think bills like this one and the 'drug tests for welfare' one from above are such great ideas that would benefit the public, why don't they ever propose bills mandating drug and DNA testing for elected officials?
...SB1400, a bill relating to 'gun-free' zones. Sponsored by Sen. Johnson and Reps. Barnes, Burges, and Pearce. The State or "any agency or political subdivision of this state or any person, organization or entity that establishes a gun-free zone" would be held liable for damages if someone is injured or otherwise hurt as a result of criminal conduct in that 'gun-free' zone and that possession of a gun would have helped the victim defend him/herself.
Brought to you by some of the same crew responsible for the 'guns in schools' bill (and the 'guns in bars' bill before it.)
...SB1493, a bill related to early ballots and voter identification. Sponsored by Sens. Gorman and Blendu and Reps. Clark and Pearce. Would mandate that when returning an early ballot, voters must include "a legible photocopy of identification."
How does a photocopy prove anything? Also, what about the expense incurred by voters, as most folks don't have copy machines at home?
Ten good bills...
...HB2114, a bill relating to unattended children in motor vehicles. Introduced by Rep. McClure. Makes the act of leaving a child unattended in a vehicle (subject to a few criteria, such as age) a Class 3 misdemeanor. Repeat offenses are Class 2 misdemeanors.
...HB2141, a bill relating to the disclosure of water supply status during the sale of residential property. Introduced by Rep. Ableser. The bill requires that licensed real estate brokers to "notice of the water supply status of that property as designated by the director of water resources." Related: HB2142, which provides for similar requirements for general sellers (i.e. - non-licensed types.)
...HB2145, a bill related to health insurance and mental health coverage parity. Sponsored by Rep. Ableser, Chabin, Farley, Desimone, and Chad Campbell. Requires that health insurance providers not place greater limitations on mental health services and coverage than they do on physical health services and coverage.
...HB2217, a bill relating to yearly limitations on tuition and fee increases at the state's public universities. Introduced by Reps. Ableser and Schapira. Mandates that any approved fee and tuition hikes not take effect until the academic year following approval.
...HB2293, a bill relating to the sentence imposed on juveniles convicted of first-degree murder. Introduced by Rep. Sinema. Bars imposition of capital punishment upon juveniles. Capital punishment should be abandoned; this bill would be a good first step.
...HB2396, a bill relating to text messaging while driving. Introduced by Reps. Farley, Pancrazi, and Nelson, and Sens. Aboud and Aguirre. Bans the sending or receiving of text messages while operating a motor vehicle. Related: HB2397, banning the use of cell phones while driving, except with a hands-free device and HB2398, banning the use of cell phones while driving, specific to Class G-licensed drivers (aka - under 18 years old).
...HB2651, a bill relating to independent voters and presidential preference primary elections. Introduced by Reps. DeSimone, Farley, Thrasher and Sen. Rios. Would allow independent voters to cast a ballot in the presidential primary of their choice. This is the bill that Sen. Harper should have written, instead of SB1064.
...SB1046, a bill relating to the enactment date of the state's education budget. Sponsored by Sen. Pesquiera. Would mandate that the lege pass the following fiscal year budget for the Arizona Department of Education by April 15th.
So simple it's brilliant. Now to get them to pass the rest of the budget before it hits 100 in Phoenix...
...SB1247, a bill relating to employer communications regarding religion or politics. Sponsored by Sen. Burton-Cahill. Bars an employer from compelling an employee to participate in an activity or communication that has the "primary purpose of communicating the employer's opinion about religious or political matters." The bill has appropriate exemptions for activities mandated by law and also for religious, political, and educational organizations.
This is how a religious liberty bill *should* be written.
SB1010, a bill relating a cell phone users' bill of rights. Sponsored by Sen. Waring. This one was a good idea when Waring introduced it in November; it's a good idea now.
The story, while it did have its good points, was also a very shallow one. 10 bills out of over 1100 filed? That's less than 1%, and the brief blurbs that the Rep wrote about the bills didn't even include basic info such as the name of the sponsor or whether or not the bill has been assigned to a committee.
So, with that serving as inspiration, here's my list of ten and ten - ten bad bills to watch, and ten good bills to watch. These aren't the only 10 bad bills, or the only 10 good bills; there's plenty more of both.
Note: in the interests of minimizing repetitiveness, no anti-immigrant or "let's balance the budget by cutting revenue" bills will be included. Those were covered pretty well in the Legislative Loon p0sts.
Ten bad bills -
...HB2096, a bill to create parental educational choice grants. Introduced by Reps. Biggs, Burges, and Murphy, and Sens. Gorman, Harper and Johnson.
After over 200 words rationalizing the need for such grants, and proclaiming that the bill's purposes are secular, the bill goes on to create a program that awards grants in the amounts of $3500 and $4500 per year payable to the "custodians" of pupils enrolled at private schools.
Undermining public education is bad enough to warrant inclusion on this list, but the language in the bill that states that schools "shall not be required to alter its creed, practices or curriculum in order to redeem grants issued pursuant to this article" is a very thinly-veiled way to funnel public funds to religious schools, notwithstanding the "secular" proclamation a the beginning of the bill.
...HB2477, a bill relating to employees of the state treasurer's office. Sponsored by Rep. Adams. Would authorize the state treasurer (currently Dean Martin) to randomly drug test employees and prospective employees, and to periodically snoop into employees' credit reports.
If Mr. Martin and his water-carrier Rep. Adams believe that there is a drug use problem in the treasurer's office, there are provisions in existing state law that would allow for drug testing in departments where there is evidence of a problem. Even if those provisions don't apply to the treasurer's office, why not change the law so that those provisions *do* apply?
Unless, of course, the underlying purpose of the program would be to control and intimidate office employees, some of whom may have spoken up over the crimes committed by previous treasurer David Petersen, who resigned in disgrace.
Something tells me that the ethically-challenged Martin wants to discourage whistle-blowers with this.
...SB1054, a bill relating to the state treasurer and independent legal counsel. Introduced by Sen. Chuck Gray. Would allow the State Treasurer's office to bypass the Attorney General and contract for outside legal counsel. The bill also exempts such contracts from the state's procurement code with its attendent oversights.
Related: SB1097, a bill from Sen. Burns to exempt the State Treasurer's office from the Government Information Technology Agency's (GITA) requirements.
Can you say "building an independent fiefdom"?
...HB2678, a bill related to welfare recipients and applicants, and drug testing. Sponsored or cosponsored by a cast of thousands (actually, a cast of 31, 30 of whom are Republicans.) Would mandate drug testing of all applicants and recipients of public assistance.
...HB2713, a bill relating to students' expression of religion. Sponsored by Reps. Clark and Anderson. Would bar a school from discriminating against a student or group of students on the basis of religion. The bill includes interesting phrasing - "If an assignment requires a student's viewpoint to be expressed in coursework, artwork or other written or oral assignments, A public educational institution shall not penalize or reward a student on the basis of religious content or a religious viewpoint." I'm not sure of this (I'm most definitely not a lawyer), but I think this might really mess up grading in science classes.
This bill may be related to conflicts like this one in the Deer Valley Unified School District, chronicled in the AZ Republic.
...HCR2041, an amendment to the state constitution barring preferential treatment based on "race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education or public contracting." Sponsored by Reps. Pearce, Barnes, Mason, Murphy, and Nelson and Senators Harper and Johnson. Basically, this is Ward Connerly's scheme to end affirmative action policies.
...SB1064, a bill relating to presidential preference elections. Sponsored by Sens. Harper and Waring. This is the one that opens up presidential primaries for everyone but Democrats. I've written about this one before.
SB1332, a bill relating to DNA testing. Sponsored by Sen. Chuck Gray. The Senator was all people who are arrested to submit to DNA testing. Compliance would be a condition of bail or "own recognizance" release - failure to comply would result in revocation of bail.
Just think - if this was in force when Joe Arpaio and Andrew Thomas tried to intimidate the New Times into silence, not only would the two journalists they arrested have had to submit DNA samples, it would now be incumbent on them to petition a court to have their DNA info removed from the state's database (as opposed to Arpaio and Thomas having to justify keeping it.)
If the esteemed members of the lege think bills like this one and the 'drug tests for welfare' one from above are such great ideas that would benefit the public, why don't they ever propose bills mandating drug and DNA testing for elected officials?
...SB1400, a bill relating to 'gun-free' zones. Sponsored by Sen. Johnson and Reps. Barnes, Burges, and Pearce. The State or "any agency or political subdivision of this state or any person, organization or entity that establishes a gun-free zone" would be held liable for damages if someone is injured or otherwise hurt as a result of criminal conduct in that 'gun-free' zone and that possession of a gun would have helped the victim defend him/herself.
Brought to you by some of the same crew responsible for the 'guns in schools' bill (and the 'guns in bars' bill before it.)
...SB1493, a bill related to early ballots and voter identification. Sponsored by Sens. Gorman and Blendu and Reps. Clark and Pearce. Would mandate that when returning an early ballot, voters must include "a legible photocopy of identification."
How does a photocopy prove anything? Also, what about the expense incurred by voters, as most folks don't have copy machines at home?
Ten good bills...
...HB2114, a bill relating to unattended children in motor vehicles. Introduced by Rep. McClure. Makes the act of leaving a child unattended in a vehicle (subject to a few criteria, such as age) a Class 3 misdemeanor. Repeat offenses are Class 2 misdemeanors.
...HB2141, a bill relating to the disclosure of water supply status during the sale of residential property. Introduced by Rep. Ableser. The bill requires that licensed real estate brokers to "notice of the water supply status of that property as designated by the director of water resources." Related: HB2142, which provides for similar requirements for general sellers (i.e. - non-licensed types.)
...HB2145, a bill related to health insurance and mental health coverage parity. Sponsored by Rep. Ableser, Chabin, Farley, Desimone, and Chad Campbell. Requires that health insurance providers not place greater limitations on mental health services and coverage than they do on physical health services and coverage.
...HB2217, a bill relating to yearly limitations on tuition and fee increases at the state's public universities. Introduced by Reps. Ableser and Schapira. Mandates that any approved fee and tuition hikes not take effect until the academic year following approval.
...HB2293, a bill relating to the sentence imposed on juveniles convicted of first-degree murder. Introduced by Rep. Sinema. Bars imposition of capital punishment upon juveniles. Capital punishment should be abandoned; this bill would be a good first step.
...HB2396, a bill relating to text messaging while driving. Introduced by Reps. Farley, Pancrazi, and Nelson, and Sens. Aboud and Aguirre. Bans the sending or receiving of text messages while operating a motor vehicle. Related: HB2397, banning the use of cell phones while driving, except with a hands-free device and HB2398, banning the use of cell phones while driving, specific to Class G-licensed drivers (aka - under 18 years old).
...HB2651, a bill relating to independent voters and presidential preference primary elections. Introduced by Reps. DeSimone, Farley, Thrasher and Sen. Rios. Would allow independent voters to cast a ballot in the presidential primary of their choice. This is the bill that Sen. Harper should have written, instead of SB1064.
...SB1046, a bill relating to the enactment date of the state's education budget. Sponsored by Sen. Pesquiera. Would mandate that the lege pass the following fiscal year budget for the Arizona Department of Education by April 15th.
So simple it's brilliant. Now to get them to pass the rest of the budget before it hits 100 in Phoenix...
...SB1247, a bill relating to employer communications regarding religion or politics. Sponsored by Sen. Burton-Cahill. Bars an employer from compelling an employee to participate in an activity or communication that has the "primary purpose of communicating the employer's opinion about religious or political matters." The bill has appropriate exemptions for activities mandated by law and also for religious, political, and educational organizations.
This is how a religious liberty bill *should* be written.
SB1010, a bill relating a cell phone users' bill of rights. Sponsored by Sen. Waring. This one was a good idea when Waring introduced it in November; it's a good idea now.
Friday, February 01, 2008
John Shadegg: Star Pupil at the Hayworth School of Campaigning?
One can only hope that Shadegg keeps serving up BP fastballs like this to the Lord campaign...
Congressman John Shadegg (R-Launderer) is now attributing his opposition to the recently-passed (by the House anyway) economic stimulus package because some of the proposed tax rebates might go to undocumented aliens who dared to work, pay income taxes, and file a return.
Now, I'm not exactly a fan of the proposal (it helps retail businesses more than it helps real people and its effects are short-term, not long-term), but he absolutely opposes an effort to mitigate the effects of the burgeoning recession in the U.S. because it could give some undocumented aliens some of their own money?
Yup, that's right - the tax rebates are just prepayments of refunds, essentially; they will reduce the following year's refund/increase the amount owed for each recipient.
And the ever-vigilant John Shadegg detected the harm in giving hardworking people the money that is theirs (whether or not they're in the U.S. legally, they earned the money), so he tried to make sure that no one would be helped.
Even if stealing the tax money of a few undocumented immigrants was an ethical activity (it's not), are there so many that qualify (by paying taxs of all things - what scofflaws! ;) ) that the numbers justify blocking the whole thing?
Of course, this is the guy who left his constituents in the lurch, campaigning for John McCain in South Carolina while Paradise Valley residents dealt with poison coming out of their faucets and one of the guys who voted against HOPE.
Why do I have the suspicion that it's people in general who are on his hit list, and immigrants are just a cover story for his votes and [in]actions?
I guess that with JD Hayworth exiled to the nether regions of the right-wing talk radio, AZ's Republicans need a candidate with a with a campaign platform plank that says "blame brown people for everything." Must be in their state party's bylaws or something. :))
Hope that tactic works as well for Shadegg in 2008 as it did Hayworth in 2006.
Stacy at AZ CongressWatch has most (or all?) of Shadegg's press release here; the Phoenix Business Journal has a story constructed from that press release here.
Later!
Congressman John Shadegg (R-Launderer) is now attributing his opposition to the recently-passed (by the House anyway) economic stimulus package because some of the proposed tax rebates might go to undocumented aliens who dared to work, pay income taxes, and file a return.
Now, I'm not exactly a fan of the proposal (it helps retail businesses more than it helps real people and its effects are short-term, not long-term), but he absolutely opposes an effort to mitigate the effects of the burgeoning recession in the U.S. because it could give some undocumented aliens some of their own money?
Yup, that's right - the tax rebates are just prepayments of refunds, essentially; they will reduce the following year's refund/increase the amount owed for each recipient.
And the ever-vigilant John Shadegg detected the harm in giving hardworking people the money that is theirs (whether or not they're in the U.S. legally, they earned the money), so he tried to make sure that no one would be helped.
Even if stealing the tax money of a few undocumented immigrants was an ethical activity (it's not), are there so many that qualify (by paying taxs of all things - what scofflaws! ;) ) that the numbers justify blocking the whole thing?
Of course, this is the guy who left his constituents in the lurch, campaigning for John McCain in South Carolina while Paradise Valley residents dealt with poison coming out of their faucets and one of the guys who voted against HOPE.
Why do I have the suspicion that it's people in general who are on his hit list, and immigrants are just a cover story for his votes and [in]actions?
I guess that with JD Hayworth exiled to the nether regions of the right-wing talk radio, AZ's Republicans need a candidate with a with a campaign platform plank that says "blame brown people for everything." Must be in their state party's bylaws or something. :))
Hope that tactic works as well for Shadegg in 2008 as it did Hayworth in 2006.
Stacy at AZ CongressWatch has most (or all?) of Shadegg's press release here; the Phoenix Business Journal has a story constructed from that press release here.
Later!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)