Fun with campaign lit... Part 5 - Iron Pyrite edition.

Actually, I'm not sure this should really be considered as campaign lit as it's not pro- or con- a specific candidate.

Found this, from the LD8 Republicans, in my door after I went shopping yesterday.

It was a list of candidates supported, and judges opposed, by them.  They favor all statewide props and opposed the local props that they mentioned. They did not mention the county prop or any school district props.

(Not) Breaking news: all of the candidates they support are Republicans.

There was one surprise, however (OK, it was more surprising for its brazenness than for anything else) -

There three candidates for the seat on the Phoenix City Council representing my district, district 8.

Two of them, the incumbent Hodge Washington, and one of her MAGA challengers, Maupin, are Black.

Her other MAGA challenger, Abasciano, is White.

So, naturally, the LD8 Republicans ignored the Black MAGA candidate and supported the White one -

They *are* Republicans, after all.

And the "iron pyrite" reference in the title?

Iron pyrite is better known as "fool's gold".

10/15 is going to be a big date for campaign finance reporting

While all of the reporting periods end on 9/30, some of the reporting periods start on 7/5 while others start on 7/22.

All of the reports are due on 10/15, it's possible that some will be filed before then.  However, most will be filed on the 15th to minimize the amount of time opponents have to examine

From the website of the Arizona Secretary of State -

Legislative schedule - week starting 10/11/2026

Basically, a duplicate of last week - there's nothing on the schedule.

Fun with campaign lit... Part 4

Note: Both pieces were addressed to people who don't currently live here, though one included "Or Current Resident" on the addressee line.

...The first piece of PAC-sent lit was paid for by "Reproductive Freedom for All Freedom Fund".  It was a pro-Amish Shah piece for the CD1 race in Arizona.

Pluses: 

It actually names Shah's opponent, Jay Feely

It has a pic of Feely with the person who he will actually work for, if elected, Cheeto.

Minuses:

It doesn't have have a pic of Shah on a pro-Shah piece.

...The other one, a pro-Feely piece, was sent by Elon Musk's America PAC -

Pluses:

The pic of Feely is much larger than on previous pieces sent by America PAC.

Minuses:

It's more than a little generic in saying what Feely will do, if elected - stand up, safeguard, balance, and strengthen?  Really? "Walk and chew gum at the same time" wasn't available?

The brazenness of the hypocrisy demonstrated here is stunning.  Rs *hate* voting by mail, but here they're encouraging their supporters to, wait for it, "vote by mail."

Not sure if it's a plus or a minus:

Nowhere does the piece mention Amish Shah, Feely's opponent.

Fun with campaign lit... Part 3

This one is pretty mundane as it sent out by the candidate.  So mundane that I have no snark at the ready.  Candidates are boring; PACs are much more fun.  Trust me. 😀

The next post will be far more interesting.

The lit piece is for the City Council race is Phoenix-

Note: Washington is my representative on the Phoenix City Council

Proposition 320: Vague, part 2

Prop 320 started out as the brainchild of MAGA Sen. and grifter Jake Hoffman, starting life as SCR1032.

A debate on the topic of Prop 320 took place.  I don't know either participant personally.

The ballot language, for all props, from the Arizona Secretary of State, is here.

As written, if approved by the voters, Prop 320 would all school districts in Maricopa and Pima counties, as well as larger districts outside of those counties to spend at least 60% of their budgets on "direct instructional expenses".

The problem is that term is never defined.

The penalties for school districts that don't comply are well-defined, though, 

As is the fact that compliance or noncompliance is determined by the legislatively-controlled Auditor General's office.

I've urged people to vote against *all* of the statewide propositions, but this might be made more palatable with two minor changes -

1. List specific definitions/meanings for "direct instructional expenses".

2. Apply it to *all* schools that receive public funding in any way, shape, or form.

I'd still vote "no", as blanket, "one size fits all" solutions for nonexistent problems never work, but it might be more palatable to voters who are less discerning than me.

Proposition 144: "Vague" is on AZ's ballot this fall

Actually, all of the ballot questions show that vague, stereotypes, and fear are on the ballot.

Prop 144 started out as the MAGA rep and attorney Alexander Kolodin-crafted HCR2001.

Note: AZPM has the video of a debate on Prop 144 here.

Caveat: There were two people speaking at the debate, and I know one of them. Randy Keating, a member of the Tempe City Council, spoke in opposition to the proposition.  I've known Councilman Keating for many years.  However, I thought Prop 144 was a bad idea *long* before I was aware that he was part of the organized opposition to the measure.

Kolodin is running for Secretary of State, a position that he can use to turn his anti-democracy ideas into public policy without the rest of the legislature, the governor, or even the Arizona Bar Association getting in his way.

Note2: There was a debate between incumbent AZ Secretary of State, Adrian Fontes and Kolodin. Two things were obvious from that debate:

1. Kolodin is woefully unqualified for the job.  Watch the debate.

2. Fontes and Kolodin *really* don't like each other. Watch the debate.

Anyway, back to Prop 144.  Not only is it aimed very specifically at people who vote by mail (which includes me, and has for over 20 years), at no point does it explain how voters will comply with its provisions, if it is approved by voters.

Nor does it establish a way for it to pay for the requirements it seeks to impose on county recorders.

Also, I thought constitutions (state and national) were about restricting governments.  Kolodin (et. al.) wishes to use the Arizona Constitution to restrict the people of Arizona.

Edit to add:

Apparently, Cheeto now likes mail-in voting...at least when it's done by his adherents -

end edit

Legislative schedule - week starting 10/4/2026

The coming week will see a return to normal, as in there is nothing on the schedule at the AZ legislature.  And I expect that there won't be until after the election.  Unless a really pressing matter comes up.

Ballot questions: school districts

 At the beginning of September, I wrote a post urging all voters to vote "No" on all statewide ballot questions.

However, the statewide questions won't be the only ones considered by voters.

Many counties and municipalities will also have questions on the ballot; and unless they're related to Flock cameras (and similar technology) and/or data centers, I almost certainly won't cover the ones that aren't on my particular ballot.

Also on the ballot will be many questions from school districts across the state.

Note: I generally support school district ballot questions.  The Republicans in the state legislature are well-known for woefully and maliciously underfunding public education.  It's incumbent on the residents of those districts to adequately fund their schools (and to stop giving the Rs a majority in the lege, but that may be a topic for another post).

Note2: I live in the Balsz school district and will vote "Yes" on my ballot, but not all districts are as well-run.  I recommend that all voters make their own choices.

From the website of the Maricopa County School Superintendent -

There are 27 districts in Maricopa County with questions on the ballot (some districts will have more than one question).

From the website of the Pima County School Superintendent -

From the website of the Yavapai County School Superintendent -

 

From the website of the Pinal County School Superintendent -

The website of the Mohave County School Superintendent doesn't list any school district ballot questions.

The above counties are the five most populous counties in AZ; there are 10 other counties here.  If you live in one of them, or anywhere in the state of Arizona for that matter, do your due diligence on school district elections in your area.

Fun with campaign lit... Part 2

Not really a surprise, but it seems that Elon Musk is prepping for 2028 even before the 2026 midterms.

Got a pro Jay Feely lit piece in the mail on Friday -

Like the previous one, it didn't mention Feely's opponent in CD1, Amish Shah.

Also like the previous one, Feely's picture was very small.

Lastly, as with the previous one, it was paid for by America PAC.

America PAC was formed by Elon Musk and some of his techbro pals in 2024 to spend money on electing Republicans...and it's still active, and not just in AZ.

It's pretty mundane stuff...in a shameless "fear the other" way.

The interesting parts are the pics on both sides of the piece.

On one side is a pic of notable progressive Democrats California governor Gavin Newsom, US Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), New  York City mayor Zohran Mamdani, and US Sen. Bernie Sanders.

On the other side is a pic of Newsom, AOC, and Sanders.

I don't believe that AOC or Mamdani will run for the Democratic nomination for POTUS in 2028; it *could* happen, but I think their focuses will be elsewhere then.  

Though I also both will look at it in future cycles.

While Sanders has run for the nomination before but he's 85 years old.  He's probably aged out of another run.

Newsom, on the other hand, hasn't been shy about letting folks know that he's *very* interested in becoming POTUS in 2028.

On the other have, while many words can be used to describe Newsom, "progressive" isn't one of them.

In a weird way, Musk's diatribes may actually help Newsom in the Democratic primary.

Most Democratic voters (including me) do not see him as progressive enough to support; Musk equating him to actual progressives can only help to burnish his image with us.

Legislative schedule - week starting 9/27/2026

By intersession standards, this week will be a busy one at the state legislature - there will be three committees meeting.  There aren't many intersession weeks where one of the meetings may become popcorn-riffic, but this one of them.

On Monday, 9/28 

-

- Public Property Towing and Impound Practices Study Committee meets at 11 a.m. in SHR1.  On the agenda: An organizational meeting, including a discussion of SB1366, which was the genesis of this committee.

On Tuesday, 9/29  

-

- Joint Legislative Ad Hoc Committee on State Land Oversight meets at 10 a.m. in HHR1.  On the agenda: Asking someone from the State Land Department about many topics, including data centers.

On Wednesday, 9/30 

-

- Joint Legislative Budget Committee meets at 1:30 p.m. in SHR109.  On the agenda: some pretty basic stuff, but what ISN'T on the agenda could make this the most colorful meeting of the week.  The committee's chair, Sen. David Farnsworth, has consented to do Sen. Jake Hoffman's bidding, and may issue legislative subpoenas to Governor Katie Hobbs and Attorney General Kris Mayes in an attempt to compel their appearances before his committee.  Hoffman would do the deed himself, but he has some credibility issues.

On Thursday, 10/1 - Nada.

Priorities: Gotta have 'em.

Unfortunately, the best interests of the people of Maricopa County aren't a priority for the Republicans in the state legislature.

In early May of 2025, the Arizona Legislature approved SB1144, authorizing the voters of Maricopa County to vote on a proposition to extend the county's jail facilities excise tax.

It will appear on the ballots of Maricopa County Voters this November as Proposition 413..

What *didn't* the legislature approve?

A bill authorizing the voters of Maricopa County to consider extending the county's sales tax expansion for transportation.

Hmmm......

I'll be voting against the extension of jail facilities excise tax, not because I'm opposed to using public funds to pay for public infrastructure, but because there's a distinct vagueness and lack of accountability in the measure.

And the fact that most of the people who submitted arguments in favor of the proposition for the county's publicity pamphlet for the measure are people who will benefit from the measure...and its vagueness.

Minor correction time: ballot measures

Earlier this month, I wrote a post urging folks to vote "No" on all ballot questions this year.

It wasn't wrong, but it's in need of clarification.

People should vote "No" on all *statewide* ballot questions; however, there are school district and local questions on each ballot that may be worthy of the support of local voters.

As there are many jurisdictions in the state (and I don't have an opinion on most local questions), I won't offer a recommendation on any of them here.

Most school district questions involve asking for permission for a budget override or continuation of a previously approved override, and, given that the Republicans in the Arizona Legislature have a preference for radically underfunding public education, I'll generally support those, but someone might live in a district that doesn't actually merit that.

Fun with campaign lit...

I thought Republicans DESPISED voting early and by mail and wanted to end both...

Got this in the mail today from the Feely campaign (he's the R nominee in AZ CD1).

It seems we've reached the "Fear The Other" portion of his campaign, and that people should vote for him (and other Rs) based on that fear.  Not because of policies (none were mentioned), just fear.

Apparently, he's OK with voting early.

Of course, based on the exhortations in the lit, he seems to be OK with people voting early...so long as they vote for him.

The most interesting part of the piece was that it had one (very small) pic of Feely, and none of Amish Shah (the Democratic nominee in the district) or even of the district itself.

However, it had two large pics of AOC, Congresswoman from New York, Bernie Sanders, Senator from Vermont, and Zohran Mamdani, Mayor of New York City.

Both pics had headlines below them intended to demonize socialism.

Which is straight out of the Cheeto playbook - demonize something, without explaining that something, and say that he can fix it...if he gets enough votes.

Oh, and the lit was paid for by a PAC.

Legislative schedule - week starting 9/20/2026

Breaking news!  There's actually some activity at the legislature!

It may only be one committee meeting on the schedule, but it's still something.

On Monday, 9/21 

 -

Joint Legislative Audit Committee meets at 9 a.m. in HHR1.  On the agenda: a bunch of reports and presentations.  Given that we are approaching an election, expect some (OK, *lots*) posturing from the committee's Republicans.

On Tuesday, 9/22, Wednesday, 9/23, and Thursday, 9/24 - Nada